Re: A quick note on <newlib.h>

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 07:03:34AM -0400, Nicholas Wourms wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>>[SNIP]
>>
>
>>This is one of the reasons that I'm getting sick of our dependency on
>>newlib.  I've asked that cygwin be taken into account when making
>>changes like this but, the last I heard, the newlib guys were stalled
>>trying to accommodate my request since the two year old gcc cross
>>compiler that they insist on using is no longer able to build cygwin.
>>
>Sneak into their office and "assist" them in an upgrade :-).  Or better 
>yet, put 'em in thier place via a live demonstration showing how wrong 
>they are.

Their offices are sprinkled around Canada and the US.  I'm working from
my home in Boston and (occasionally) out of the new Boston office.
That's not going to work.

>>It's easy enough to add another include path to cygwin but I'm not sure
>>that I want to do that.  I think, instead, I'm going to start thinking
>>about how we can eliminate our dependency on newlib.
>>
>I know this has been talked about to death, but in light of your 
>comments I feel it is appropriate to revisit the matter.  Although not a 
>trivial task, perhaps we should seriously consdier switching to glibc? 

Licensing.

cgf