In my simple mind it might be easier to modify bionic to become 'a port of *BSD libc' (adding missing syscalls and whatnot) than to port it all to Linux from scratch?
2010/10/28 finkler <fink...@officinamentis.org>: > On 10/12/10 07:58, Wolf Tivy wrote: >>> 2. Demonstrate stand-alone static binaries that have been linked >>> against bionic/x86. >> >> This assumes we have bionic itself working. Has anyone actually built it >> without building all of android? I got the source, but I can't make it >> build. I've tried a few things, but I hate makefiles. Especially when >> they're called Android.mk. >> >> > Have there ever been any efforts to create a suckless libc ? I mean > instead of porting bionic, which is based on the OpenBSD libc, one could > start with the OpenBSD libc to begin with. > Remove all the macro crap and just support c99 and POSIX, which is one > of the few cases where it might actually be worth the hassle to follow > such a standard. > Then again it seems backward to put so much effort in an outdated > standard. I don't really know, any thoughts on this? > > regards, > finkler > > >
