This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Intention of "headers-not-in-tirpc"?+
- From: Thorsten Kukuk <kukuk at suse dot de>
- To: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 07:04:10 +0100
- Subject: Re: Intention of "headers-not-in-tirpc"?+
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160317194236 dot GA16154 at suse dot de> <20160318215347 dot B4A732C3C61 at topped-with-meat dot com> <20160319123137 dot GB302 at suse dot de> <20160321061625 dot GO6588 at vapier dot lan> <20160321064159 dot GA7885 at suse dot de> <20160321231058 dot GW6588 at vapier dot lan>
On Mon, Mar 21, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> again, why is that our problem ? and do you have any actual users here ?
It would be really helpful, if you would read what I wrote and not only go
immeaditly in your "No" and "I don't care" mode.
As I already wrote, from customer configurations I know that a lot of
companies are using a central /etc/rpc database.
> we've already said RPC code is dead to us and it needs to go.
Goodbye NFS? Sorry, but only because not everything is using RPC, it does
not mean it is dead. There are a few, but very important consumers of it.
> we happened to provide a (rarely used) nss indirection is not interesting.
Pleaes prove that it is rarely used.
> alternative C libraries (e.g. uClibc/musl/dietlibc) have yet to see any
> requests for these things. can you cite equiv functionality in other OS's
> either (like Solaris) ?
Please don't compare such features with special, very small implementations
where the goal was to provide only the minimum basic libc functionality.
And of course Solaris has this. And FreeBSD has it, too. Looks like, you
did never take a closer look at this topic.
Thorsten
--
Thorsten Kukuk, Senior Architect SLES & Common Code Base
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)