Re: Re: [UnixOS2] libc

On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 02:28:06PM +0200, Stefan Neis wrote:
> > For example, if you have 0 "third-party C++", then your argument does
> > not make sense.  Given that a "C++ library" is an oxymoron anyway, I
> > do not expect you to have much more than 0.  ;-)
> 
> If you put a 1 in front of that 0, you're approximately right.
> For C libraries, it's about the same (mostly XFree related), but
> recompiling shouldn't be a problem if it's necessary.

I have an order (or two) more here.  And some of them take hours to
recompile.  (And I do not have a ready-to-recompile environment but
for a handful of them.)

Hope this helps,
Ilya