On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:02:29 +0200
Kamil Cholewiński <harry666t_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Kamil,
> So libc is overkill, but instead you ship an entire tangled hierarchy of
> nonportable and arch-specific headers to talk directly to the kernel,
> which will all probably break in a random point release.
I couldn't agree more.
> > Overkill, don't need that much.
This is so full of bullshit. There's no reason e.g. not to make it
compilable on the BSD's. The Linux syscall-interface is also prone
to changes.
You should really re-think this decision. If you talk about overkill,
what is the big deal? You'll find a libc in any system really, and
even for crazy embedded cases, you could just create a statically
linked binary.
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Thu Jun 09 2016 - 15:41:22 CEST