>> In <199901030911.BAA21014@bitmover.com> Larry McVoy (lm@bitmover.com) wrote:
>>
>> > Such as? The only substantial chunk is gcc and that isn't part of the
>> > operating system.
>>
>> Such as Libc. I'm NEVER seen ANY Linux distribution without some form of libc.
>> ALL libc's for Linux are derived from GNU Libc (1 or 2)... For Linux
>> developers libc is somewhat even more important then kernel.
TL> (...)
>> Libc, derived from GNU Libc (be it libc4, libc5 or glibc2) is
>> inevitable in Linux world...
TL> Unless you want to use the Berkeley libc, which is unencumbered and perfectly
TL> suitable for use under Linux.
Of course ! In this case this will be BSD/Linux, not GNU/Linux :-)
>> > Yeah, right. Have you actually tried this for any real application?
>> > Sure, it's true for simple stuff but it is far from true for anything
>> > real.
>>
>> Yes, there ARE differences between glibc-based Hurd and glibc-based Linux
>> (thus GNU/Linux, not just GNU :-), but glibc-based Linux is close to
>> glibc-based Hurd then to libc5-based Linux (from application developer
>> viewpoint that is).
TL> With the slight exception that both Linuxes are useful systems.
Hurd is also useful system. Lack of cool installation program and hardware
drivers do not make system useless ...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/