All,
On 2017-03-20 21:34 +0100, Yann E. MORIN spake thusly:
On 2017-03-20 20:51 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 18:21:45 +0100, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
What do you think about following patch? We had some discussion about this recently on the buildroot mailinglist. Any other use cases other than rpcbind/nfs-utils you can think of?
I had a quick look in Buildroot to see which packages currently only work with "native RPC" (i.e provided by the C library) and not with libtirpc.
[--SNIP--]
- samba4, depends on BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_NATIVE_RPC only
Given the size of the package, I doubt having it depends on glibc would be too bad.
And when glibc actually drops their internal rpc, then samba will have to add suopport for an alternative implementation.
I had a quick look at bLFS again, and they recommend building against libtirpc:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/basicnet/samba.html
So we may in the end be also able to switch entirely to using libtirpc.
Regards, Yann E. MORIN.