Message-Id: <200006031938.WAA07186@mailgw1.netvision.net.il> Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 22:37:16 +0200 X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.1.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5b From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: pjfarley AT banet DOT net (Peter J. Farley III) CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: <39393dbc.1761050@news3.banet.net> (pjfarley@banet.net) Subject: Re: netbd.h, sockets.h, in.h and types.h don't work References: <3936DA62 DOT 9581F9CE AT bigfoot DOT com> <3936feb4 DOT 2522956 AT news3 DOT banet DOT net> <200006020819 DOT LAA02863 AT alpha DOT netvision DOT net DOT il> <39393dbc DOT 1761050 AT news3 DOT banet DOT net> Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > From: pjfarley AT banet DOT net (Peter J. Farley III) > Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp > Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:33:59 GMT > > What if the installation of a (stable, robust) networking library > merged it into libc? I.E., instead of establishing a separate > library, "make install" for the networking library components would > add the ".o" files into libc, thus providing a single source for > linker resolution? Along with installing all the networking headers > in "standard" include directories, of course. I don't like the idea of a package that frobs the standard libraries. I think it is better to simply make networking to libc.a, if a stable and mature networking library is available. But someone should do the hard work of figuring out the problems and submitting patches to include that.