Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > We probably could have a libhurd. > > > > Eek, no. libc. > > I think it eases life all around not to throw new things into libc. > libutil perhaps. Other new libraries that have OS-independent interface > are fine too. For new interfaces that will be Hurd-specific, some lib in > the hurd tree is the right thing.
Well, libc should be the standard library for user programs on the Hurd. That is, a GNU/Hurd system should have one standard library: libc. We specifically chose *not* to have a generic "Hurd" library, because libc already *is* the generic Hurd library. libshouldbeinlibc is a good place for things where the interface might change and we aren't sure how it will develop. Once we are quite certain it's stable, then a function there should be migrated into libc. _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
