This is the mail archive of the
libc-ports@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libc-ports project.
Re: Confirming porting strategy
On Fri, 2005-09-23 at 14:49 -0400, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> The main issue with newlib is that it appears to be dead. The last
> tarball of newlib was done in 1994. There have been some changes since
> then (e.g. C99).
Daniel has graciously pointed out that I can't read what is directly in
front of me. Before the newlib lurkers jump me: my apologies. The last
newlib update was 2004.
Good. So the issue for us is reduced to compatibility around things like
wide character support, NLS, and so forth.
I think this will ultimately hinge on two issues:
+ difficulty of maintenance of two libraries vs. one
+ how much of the POSIX environment it makes sense for us to retain
The second one is the key. We do not yet know what the "native"
operating environment of a native Coyotos app really looks like. If the
functionality involved is close enough to POSIX, then it makes perfect
sense to use the existing POSIX interface for that function, and at that
point we ought to be able to do a minimally invasive port of GLIBC.
shap