[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:28:05 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Johannes Berg <address@hidden>
> The vu_ layer certainly could contribute to this solution; however I do
> think it is -- as is -- too heavy-weight. We'd also need to consider the
> "deployment" of vu_ in existing apps/libs like libz, "libpatch", ...
It's not a priority, of course. Many apps do bizarre, stupid things.
That said: I have in the past converted some class unix apps to vu
users. It was pretty easy and beneficial to do so.
> For this to be really useful, a simple vu_ layer must exist that libraries
> can trivially link,
You are assuming the answer to a "make or take" decision regarding
legacy software. That's a mistake, imo.
I'll call "time" rather than replying to the rest of your message.
Partly it's just an "experience" thing and in "education" mode, I
think that just short quick points are the best answers on g-a-u.
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless, chth, 2004/09/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless, Matthew Dempsky, 2004/09/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless, chth, 2004/09/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless, Johannes Berg, 2004/09/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless, Tom Lord, 2004/09/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless, Johannes Berg, 2004/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless, tomas, 2004/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless, Tom Lord, 2004/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] libpatch hack WAS: --forward mostly harmless,
Tom Lord <=