[klibc] klibc rejected for 2.6.18

[H. Peter Anvin]

maximilian attems wrote:
> 
> why couple the removal of in kernel code with klibc addition?
> i think the in kernel code should go through the
> feature-removal-schedule.txt procedure.
> such a patch should be the last of the klibc series.
> 

Well, first of all because maintaining multiple parallel pieces of code 
is a nightmare, and second because Linus stated that as a precondition 
for merging klibc several years ago.

	-hpa