Baslinux mailing list

[David Moberg <davidjmoberg AT gmail.com>]

On 10/28/05, sindi keesan <keesan AT sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> > What should we do about this situation? Obviously, a new netpbm package
> > would be useful. But how should it be compiled? If it is statically
> compiled,
> > a lot of space is wasted. If it is built against libc5, some useful
> > features will
> > be left out. If it is built against glibc, some users will need to update
> their
> > libraries. Your thoughts? (what about uclibc?)
>
> Since BL3 works fine with the SW81 libc6 added to it, I would like to see
> netpbm compiled for BL2 with that library, which is only 1-2MB (I think).
> Or at least with the SW71 libc6 (2.1.3) if all programs will compile with
> it.

Should it be built like busybox (all functionality in one large binary) or in
the standard way (hundreds of small binaries, one per function)? Is it
reasonable to expect the user to have libtiff, libjpeg, etc. or should they
be built in? What versions of these libraries are people likely to have?
(I really don't know) What do you think of all this, Mikkel?

> Has anyone used a color laser printer with BL yet?

I have not.

> Anyway, I can think of lots of uses for netpbm, and it would be more
> convenient to use with BL2 if I did not also have to keep libc5 on hand
> and point things at other libraries built with it.

That is for sure.

I have not really tried to use many programs with diverse library
requirements under BL3. I wonder if a problem (similar to what you
have experienced) would occur if you tried to juggle as many
libraries on top of BL3.

David