[klibc] why klibc? (Re: Polling again: switch the list over to subscriber-only?)

Oleg Verych olecom at gmail.com
Fri Mar 21 15:07:04 PDT 2008

On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 9:39 PM, Jeff Bailey
<jbailey at raspberryginger.com> wrote:
> The only question that comes to mind is the future of klibc. Is there
>  still potential for merging at some point?  In ubuntu we never got to
>  where we could do without glibc

to do what?
dual and quad cores in laptop with vista or similar (X based) operating
systems are no better, than toasters in `xbill`.

what was really done new and useful in recent years?
zoos of
 * scripting and other languages,
 * window managers
 * useless GUI programs.
 * codecs
 * media players

klibc is a good place to start even for aged kernel developers to do
better, not sucking userspace.

 * boot
 * kernel run-time configuration
 * early userspace configuration and setup
 * efficient
   * shell
   * text-processing tools http://kernelnewbies.org/olecom
 + test bed (workability, security) for kernel interfaces
 + IDE for kernel development and usage
   - better, smart console (user-friendly, not legacy input and output)
   - smart and efficient text-based UI library
   - library of scripts and tools to make userspace (now mainly
     usr/inlude, glibc) manageable
   - same for kernel development

making this working in kernel-friendly way, way, that kernel developers
can walk easily themselves, might be a good reason to keep and
develop klibc.

i don't know why libc5 was abandoned, but surely solaris-based glibc
with all those enterprise-only features of linux kernel are no way to go
for simple and efficient operating system for ordinary users...

mouse-clicking toaster -users and -developers don't care, for sure.
 #oo'L O
<___=E M

More information about the klibc mailing list