[uClibc]cvs commit to uClibc/ld.so by andersen

[Tom Cameron]

Micheal,
	I like the idea of multiple libraries...the more I think about
it, the easier it would be to compile different apps vs. uClibc (without
hacking makefiles, etc.).  One of my fears was simply the wasted space
in the hosting filesystem image.  Basically, the overhead used when
writing files to a filesystem adds up quickly, as I'm sure you are well
aware of.
	Also, I was digging through some docs. for romfs, and noticed a
little mention of read-write mode.  Not that there is one, but that
there is the possibility.  I'll probably contact the developer(s) and
inquire further on this matter.  Indeed I will keep you posted.

--
Thomas Cameron
Network Technician / Operations Specialist
St. Mary's Bank

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Michael Shmulevich [SMTP:michaels at jungo.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, April 18, 2001 3:13 PM
> To:	Tom Cameron
> Cc:	AVENARD,JEAN-YVES (HP-Australia,ex2);
> uclibc at uclibc.org
> Subject:	Re: [uClibc]cvs commit to uClibc/ld.so by andersen
> 
> Tom Cameron wrote:
> 
>  >> This is part of my job in Jungo, to check that all packages'
> Makefiles
>  >> are configured for uclibc.
> 
> > So then it's job security to keep it the way it is.  ; )  The more I
> > think about it, the more I like it, I guess.  
> 
> I don't care too much for compatibility, since I make my updates quite
> 
> portablle, based on configuration. Currently our source tree compiles 
> both under glibc and uclibc. So do you like more the initial idea of 
> single lib or multiple task-oriented libs?
> 
> 
> > I just wish there were a read-write version
> > of romfs.  Ahwell.
> 
> I could use one too :-) Can you please notify me when one such
> arrives?
> 
> 
> 
> Sincerely yours,
> Michael Shmulevich
> ______________________________________
> Software Developer
> Jungo - R&D
> email: michaels at jungo.com
> web: http://www.jungo.com
> Phone: 1-877-514-0537(USA)  +972-9-8859365(Worldwide) ext. 233
> Fax:   1-877-514-0538(USA)  +972-9-8859366(Worldwide)