This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [libc-alpha] Re: [open-source] Re: Wish for 2002
- From: tb at becket dot net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
- To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds at transmeta dot com>
- Cc: Roland McGrath <roland at frob dot com>, Kaz Kylheku <kaz at ashi dot footprints dot net>, Russ Allbery <rra at stanford dot edu>, <libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: 09 Jan 2002 19:09:38 -0800
- Subject: Re: [libc-alpha] Re: [open-source] Re: Wish for 2002
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0201091842260.1102-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> writes:
> If you add functions eagerly because adding functions is "cheap" (like you
> claimed), then you WILL have a big footprint. And a big footprint is bad
> on small machines because it slows the whole machine down, both from a
> loading standpoint and a resource use (TLB, cache, memory etc) standpoint.
Right, but I'm inclined to think that a general-purpose glibc does not
really need to worry about desktop systems that cannot even be
purchased anymore.
> No, it's the same issue. And it happens with _new_ hardware too. The
> palmtops of today are not actually all that different from the desktops of
> 5-10 years ago.
Sure, but why do we think that we should have one library for both?
I'm happy to say: very different computers, very different needs.