On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 09:46:19PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > With the proviso that static linking against libc6 is more likely to > introduce ABI problems via nss than just dynamically linking against an old > libc6 ABI (i.e., GLIBC_2.0 or GLIBC_2.1).
Not to mention the LGPL too. Static linking against glibc is strongly disrecommended by upstream. For user space apps the dynamic interface to glibc is probably a better target to aim for than the kernel - it's offering pretty much the same level of ABI stability and is much less hassle. -- "You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
