lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Nov]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: history of libc
On Wed, 25 Nov 1998 03:22:26 EST, Rick Hohensee wrote:
> When did Linux get a libc? Has it always been a GNU libc?

To expand a little upon this question: I got linux 0.10 to compile with
modern tools (egcs-1.1b, latest binutils), and it even boots. It took
some assembly and Makefiles hacking to get 0.10 to run compiled as
ELF.. :) But now I have to give it a root filesystem, and while I can
easily create a minixfs, I have no binaries to run.

Compiling some aout binaries is not a problem, but against what library?
Would a static 4.7.x libc be "old enough"? :-) And, more important, is
even aout (whichever variant of it my aout 2.7.2 will generate) "old
enough" for 0.10? :-)

If some old-time guru is reading this, please speak up and shed some
light.. :-)

P.S. The modified 0.10-ELF tarball is available at
ftp://moisil.cs.columbia.edu/pub/linux/


Ion

--
It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool,
than to open it and remove all doubt.

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [W:0.061 / U:0.576 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site