[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: uptime (coreutils)

From: Roland McGrath
Subject: Re: uptime (coreutils)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 17:52:45 -0500 (EST)

> Oh, of course; those aren't system-specific libraries though.  It's
> the idea of splitting libc into different system specific libraries
> that I think is a mistake.

Noone suggested that.

> I have no objection to a new generically named library for specific
> sets of tasks.

As I said, libutil might be fine for the uptime thing.

> (Of course five of the libraries in your list are all generated from
> the libc source. :)

I'm lazy.

> Except I think it's a mistake to label those "linux-specific".  The
> danger of that is that as soon as it gets implemented on some other
> system, it ceases to be Linux specific.

Like I already said three times, something that can conceivably be generic
belongs in a generic place.

> Moreover, there is nothing Hurd-specific about fetch_boot_time.  It
> should be implementable on any system, and is a reasonable entirely
> generic function.

That's why I made this distinction at the beginning.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]