On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 06:33:44PM -0400, Bryan Donlan wrote: > >> Why would they use less memory? > > > > Since they don't link against a large library. Granted, that is only a > > benefit > > if all running programs link against libposix instead of glibc. > > What makes you think libposix will be smaller? It is currently very > incomplete; by the time it reaches a full implementation of POSIX, it > may well be the same size as libc.
Glibc implements much more than just POSIX, and it is not known for its
leanness, hence the existence of dietlibc, uClibc, etc.
> > If I'm compiling I'd rather do it on a fast desktop with all my usual stuff
> > installed than on an embedded system.
>
> Again, this is what a cross-compile toolchain is for (mandatory if
> your embedded platform is anything other than your desktop arch!). You
> could adapt the crosstool buildscripts that uclibc uses, for example.
> If you just use debian's normal GCC, you're going to have a hell of a
> time convincing it to not use libc's include files/statically-linked
> startup objects/dynamic linker.
That's true. Probably something the upstream maintainer should consider to
provide.
--
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <g...@debian.org>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
