> > > We fixed pam to run on native libc a long time ago. It wasn't that bad, > > > once I got libshadow written. And last I knew you didn't have an X > > > server package, which I had on the native libc a long time ago. > > > > I was referring to the GNU/NetBSD port. See bug #201683 for example, and > > compare it to the one-liner patch I sent to pam. As for Xfree86, try > > "wc -l debian/patches/84*" in the source tree. Just a pair of examples. > > > > (btw, fixing the X server is on my todo) > > All I have to say about the X server, as the person who generated most > of the patches, is that they're actually very straightforward, if rather > invasive. I simply had to go through each config option and decide whether > it should be handled in the 'native' way, or the GNU-userland way (and it > was very much a userland issue, not a libc issue). > > The *hard* part was in hunting down build problems and bad assumptions in > something the size of the X codebase. That isn't going to be any saner on a > Glibc+FreeBSD system; probably less sane, in fact.
That was pretty much my experience, too. In fact, I tried to get it working on glibc, and had fits with it. I particularly remember xterm being a disaster. I gave up on it, and Robert evidently got it working except for the server. It probably needs some headers in <sys/> that glibc didn't get right. ---Nathan