* Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [021115 12:17] wrote: > :Will the knobs allow one to link /bin and /sbin against full blown > :libc? That would be nice as we can then start using pam and user > :management in / with dynamic modules (finally!). > : > :-- > :-Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > I think that should be a goal. I think something like this: > > USE_MINIC=YES Link against the mini-C library. > > USE_SHARED_BIN=YES Link against a shared libc or mini-C rather > then linking statically.
Moiving forward I think it makes the most sense for us to maker /s?bin dynamically linked against libc by default with options for linking statically or dynamically against libc or mini-libc via make.conf. > All mini-C is is the full blown C library minus some of > the larger chunks of bloat. e.g. no locale, smaller > but less efficient malloc, and a trimmed down printf. > At least that is what it is turning out to be. Even > programs like /bin/rm require DBM and syslog. It can > get nasty real fast. > > Basically libminic will override particular source files > in libc to generate the smaller footprint. > > If we want to trim down mini-C further, removing things > like DBM, we could, but then we would not be able to use > mini-C for all of bin and sbin. I appreciate you taking the time and interest in this. It will help our embedded guys and give us all something new and interesting to play with. thanks, -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
