| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
I'll explain:I'll explain:Posted Oct 25, 2006 16:11 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: I'll explain: by khim Parent article: GPLv3: What the Hackers Said (Linux Journal)
From the point of view of compiling and running non-sysadmin-as-root things, glibc/coreutils and uClibc/busybox are similar: they're POSIX. glibc is a more complete implementation than uClibc, but there's no magic GNU sauce that makes uClibc 'not a toy'.
(However, it *is* targetted at a different domain, and I'd not expect to see distros using uClibc springing up because of uClibc's intentional total lack of ABI guarantees.)
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||