Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th May 2009 17:41 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Debian and its clones Via LWN, we found a blog post of a Debian maintainer which announces a new package: EGLIBC, a compatible reimplementation of the GNU glibc which "which will soon replace the GNU C Library". Apparently the primary reason is the sadly famous bad maintainership aptitude of Ulrich Drepper, the main libc maintainer.
Thread beginning with comment 362172
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Alex Forster
Member since:
2005-08-12

It's bad enough having to take into account all the different library versions and combinations we have already... and now we may end up having to add the C library--the most basic and what should most definitely be a relative constant--into that mix.


Compile statically, for one. A multi-megabyte binary isn't a big deal when the average consumer has a half a terabyte at their disposal. Choosing what to link with will make up about 1/1,000,000,000th of your total development time. This really won't cause Adobe to abandon their Photoshop port.

Reply Parent Score: 3

wanderingk88 Member since:
2008-06-26

Many (most?) commercial apps usually are compiled statically anyways, so...

Reply Parent Score: 1

bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

If you're using lgpl libraries compiling totally static can be a PITA. Also compiling opengl statically isn't possible because of the different backend blobs provided by nvidia & ati.

That's why I believe some baseline glibc symbol compatibility to be the most effective way to handle basic compatibility. "apbuild" allows you to do this.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

That's why I believe some baseline glibc symbol compatibility to be the most effective way to handle basic compatibility.


? Glibc already versions all of it's external symbols to achieve great forwards compatibility. The ABI hasn't been broken in a very, very long time.

Reply Parent Score: 2