considering using autoconfig?

[walter harms]

Hi Dai,
your observation is true but stuff like this can be handled in platform.h

since libc is the only library busybox links again aufoconf would be overkill.

second to this bb is used by embedded developers they basicly have a kernel
(perhaps modified) an libc (with custom externsion ?) and bb.
As you have seen it is easy to identify the problem and fix it, adding that
you may have custom extensions it is easy to imagine that nightmare of
testing you need.

ntl: feel free to improve the libc detection !

disclaimer: that is my view not that of the bb ml :)

re,
 wh


Yuwen Dai wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> When I was testing the svn version of busybox, I found busybox could be
> compiled with a higher glibc version, while could not with a lower version.
> For example, the macro `__GLIBC__' referenced in makedev.c  is defined in
> different header files.  Are busybox developer considering using
> autoconfig?
> 
> best regards,
> Yuwen
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> busybox mailing list
> busybox at busybox.net
> http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox