[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RPC user stub libraries
From: |
Thomas Schwinge |
Subject: |
Re: RPC user stub libraries |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:26:10 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
Hello!
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:18:52AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 19/07/10 23:06, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> >> * What's the reason for having a libmachuser / libhurduser be part of
> >> glibc?
> >>
> >> Is it for Roland's convenience, or is there a technical reason? Can
> >> we move it out of the glibc build process?
> >
> > Given the need for the libraries, they have to be built somewhere. Since
> > glibc needs to use these interfaces, you can't possibly have gnulibc without
> > them.
>
> It would still be possible to move libhurduser to Hurd, though? That way you
> avoid the issue that if you add an RPC and want to use it in another part of
> Hurd, you need to add it, build glibc with the new Hurd installed, and then
> use
> it. The same applies if you want to use it from an independent project, with
> libhurduser in Hurd you would only need a new Hurd.
I suppose it's a bootstrapping problem: to create (link) the shared
libmachuser / libhurduser, libc is needed. And libc on the other hand
needs libmachuser / libhurduser. Thus it's the easiest to build them
side-by-side. Thomas / Roland, correct? Of course, this isn't really
important anymore / isn't a problem anymore, as soon as there is a libc
(and the interfacing between lib*user and libc is set in stone).
Regards,
Thomas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature