H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Okay, as of this point, I think klibc is in quite good shape; my
> testing so far is showing that it can be used as a drop-in replacement
> for the kernel root-mounting code.
[]
> Thus, it's not clear to me what particular approach makes most sense for
> pushing upstream.
Why this needs to be "pushed" upstream in the first place? Isn't it
simpler/easier/whatever to just require klibc to be present on the
build system for kernel? If klibc is "sufficiently" independent of
the kernel (is it? I see no reason it shouldn't), why it should go
with kernel? Just point your CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE to some klibc
directory tree and be done with it, no need to distribute/build
klibc with kernel..
Thanks.
/mjt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
