Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 8 Mar 2003 01:38:12 +0100 (CET) | From | Roman Zippel <> | Subject | Re: [BK PATCH] klibc for 2.5.64 - try 2 |
| |
Hi,
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Right, of course. However, the first step (which Greg has accomplished) > is to get klibc merged into the kernel build. We already have ipconfig > and mount-nfs binaries which compile against klibc; now we need to > integrate them so they can pick up the ip= and nfsroot= options and do > the right thing in userspace.
But before it's actually merged, I would slowly really like to know the reasoning for license. You completely avoid that question and that makes me nervous. Why did you choose this license over any GPL variant? We could as well integrate dietlibc and if anyone has a problem with it, he can still choose your klibc. Why should I contribute to klibc instead of dietlibc?
bye, Roman
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |