uclibc vs glibc
robert at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Nov 1 17:24:39 PST 2004
Uclibc has recieved less testing and has fewer developers than Glibc, but
anyone following Glibc knows it is never stable (anymore). Bugfixes sent to
Glibc often don't get commited at all, when they do it is usually months
later... in the case of the owl fix, it was finally accepted and fixed by
Glibc about 7 months after the problem was addressed, Uclibc took it
seriously strait away.. referenced here:
Uclibc is much more interested in supporting security features then Glibc is.
Getting propolice into Glibc upstream will probily never happen, its always
helpful when the upstream developers are supporting what we're doing. Glibc
has their own agenda.
The package size isn't really an issue, but less code and fewer features
usually translates into something that is easier to manage. Aswell Uclibc's
config is a very nice way of installing just the features we want. Glibc's
configure is much less configurable.
More information about the hlfs-dev