Baslinux mailing list

[James Miller <jamtat AT mailsnare.net>]

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 3aoo-cvfd AT dea.spamcon.org wrote:

> I was planning on using the new 2.0.40 kernel (which is due 
> to be released at the end of the month).  However, I've just 
> discovered a conflict between uClibc and the 2.0.39 kernel 
> that I'm using for testing.  Hopefully I will be able to find 
> the source of the problem.  I'd really like to use 2.0.40, 
> which provides updated functionality in a small kernel (387 kb 
> at the moment).  If necessary, I could use libc5 (which is half 
> the size of glibc2).  It is infinitely more stable than uClibc, 
> which is continally releasing bugfixes and is planning a major 
> revision soon which will break binary compatibility with all 
> previous versions.  Even though uClibc is half the size of
> libc5, I wonder whether it is worth the trouble?

So BL3 will be a move back to the 2.0.x kernel?  Interesting.  Of course 
the problem with libc5 is that not many up-to-date apps work with it, 
right?  Wasn't that largely the reason for going with a 2.2.x kernel and 
glibc2?  uClibc seems definitely a better direction if there's alot of 
application development going on for that set of libraries.  Breaking 
binary compatibility soon with a new release does sound rather ominous, 
though.

Slowly surfacing after the move; hope to get back to that 386 project soon 
(now that my LAN is getting back to functionality).

James