On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 12:12:33PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote: > I'm interested in maintaining a i386-uclibc architecture, which is, like > the name says, i386 binaries linked with uClibc. My plans are:
> 1) Build all the packages used by debootstrap to generate a basedebs.tgz > 2) Certify this basedebs works with a fresh instalation. > 3) Start building a incresing number of packages, but certainly only a > small subset of the i386 architecture. > This is because the performance uclibc gives on old/small computers is a > must to use linux on old hardware (like my crappy 486 laptop with 8Mb > RAM or my pentium 133 with 32Mb RAM). I've already tested the uclibc > buildroot, and it makes my 486 use only 2Mb RAM after complete boot and > running a shell, but it would be much better to be able to run apt-get > update, apt-get dist-upgrade... > Ok, now what's the problem... > The i386 packages won't be compatible with my i386-uclibc environment > (as I won't have glibc installed). So I started calling the architecture > i386-uclibc with gnu name i386-uclibc-linux. And I'd like to ask: Is it > OK? Can libstdc++ be built against uclibc? You're going to have a hard time basing a Debian port on uclibc without it. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
