Missing error_print_progname in new snapshot.

[sjhill at realitydiluted.com]

> > Which is the whole fricking point. THIS IS NOT GENTOO. THIS IS NOT GENTOO.
> 
> This is not buildroot either. This is uClibc. (or?)
> 
buildroot and uClibc go hand in hand.

> > People want and expect buildroot to work with uClibc out of the box.
> 
> I don't care about buildroot. I care about a good uclibc. I know what I
> care about does not matter, I just want to let you know that there are
> people out here, using uclibc *without* buildroot.
> 
Which I am well aware of. Think of buildroot as the testsuite for a
working uClibc. The test programs with uClibc are not enough. buildroot
is the test of whether uClibc is usable for an entire system. 

> There are other ways to use uclibc than using buildroot.
> 
I'm not arguing that. I'm thrilled to see distros based on uClibc. The
point is that buildroot is the reference/standard for showing a working
uClibc system.

> In practice, That means that you cannot develop uclibc without
> developing buildroot.
> 
Now you're starting to understand. buildroot and uClibc should be
developed together.

> Doesn't it matter that uclibc is working even if buildroot doesn't?
> 
See previous answer.

> Is that the reason that there is no separate list for buildroot?
> 
See previous previous answer.

-Steve