> 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.
Nonsense. It already has dozens of standard libraries. > We specifically chose *not* to have a generic "Hurd" library, because > libc already *is* the generic Hurd library. Nonsense. We did what was convenient. It is more convenient for writing applications if nonportable interface are in OS-specific libraries. As I said, things with generic interfaces belong in generic libraries. Few if any new interface belong in libc itself, but that is a very minor technical detail. _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
