<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 16 March 2015 at 18:24, Khem Raj <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:raj.khem@gmail.com" target="_blank">raj.khem@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div id=":4bd" class="a3s" style="overflow:hidden">Patches are fine in this series, however I just want to set the expectations right here. While having that libc-independent goal is fine.<br>
Sometimes we just can not do it, since uclibc or musl<br>
does not have all the features that glibc has and an app might also be using it.<br>
making glibc users not have those features is unfair<br>
given that we have a strong mechanism of overrides in OE, it should be used to this advantage.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>But these patches, which add configure options to enable/disable the relevant functionality and have been sent upstream - represent the ideal case as once they're merged won't cost us any effort in the future.</div><div><br></div><div>Ross </div></div></div></div>