Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 25 Nov 1998 20:10:21 -0500 | From | Ion Badulescu <> | Subject | Re: 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/
| |