> Not for user programs; those are all for servers. libc libm libdl libutil libresolv libcrypt libncurses libreadline
The list goes on. > It was you, in fact, who insisted originally that we should not have a > separate library for "the Hurd", any more than there is a separate > "Linux" library. Well, you used to be named Michael; I think my vacillation is minor in comparison. I think there ought to be a separate Linux library for purely Linux-specific interfaces that other system could possibly implement. It just makes life simpler for writing portable applications. There are only a few pieces of a GNU/Linux ABI that are hard to match exactly on a non-Linux implementation. It just makes sense to segregate those so their library (or at least version set) dependencies indicate clearly what kind of nonportable hooey they rely on. > We haven't done that in the past; libc has historically had lots of > nonportable interfaces, and not just for the Hurd. Actually there really aren't that many nonportable interfaces. I would like to have fewer. _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
