From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-f170.google.com (mail-ie0-f170.google.com [209.85.223.170]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE1F9E00B90 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:49:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ie0-f170.google.com with SMTP id rd18so2359320iec.15 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:49:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=8uYB0twroHy5xyfWMoeMl90LnA/J8Q/XaoZbrEbQ9h8=; b=bzU72nY4tGqejyc6g9GMp5ekYIVPFytvtsFK7n1z/pH/2SCISDKAtScuhe4p3Aie0r ug6Swj26MQxW4u2/DGoJAonW1aJBbAYIkEHPBO+5BYNGTTe69cpLcNWRuUSNcyEwgkib 7VYsP0o4/2FGK08FtwxG/1cUDJs7RNk28y5PCHtn/u3O5PoUkLC3ZxoLSf3dfeDIyci1 mv64ZmkY8oD6TieCCiqVSY4YprfHINn0Yq0kNuNADCPnS2iVOYXlkW09fb+wLTa28pRn iL5Xnd8ShTGTqNqL/HFCgiWlLc6aLEmLK0L6m94ZNmTDoEYtQWisc51kijRRjLBKtE5c VErA== X-Received: by 10.42.16.199 with SMTP id q7mr63149348ica.16.1395870598641; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:49:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.224.136 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:49:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140326174829.5d897f11@skate> References: <20140326174829.5d897f11@skate> From: Khem Raj Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:49:28 -0700 Message-ID: To: Thomas Petazzoni Cc: Yocto discussion list , openembedded-core Subject: Re: [OE-core] OpenEmbedded and musl-libc X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 21:50:02 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Dear Khem Raj, > > On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 11:22:24 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > >> it has been under my radar for a while. I have actually locally made >> toolchains with >> clang+musl and it seems to be coming along. its licensed differently thats >> the biggest attraction for folks who do static linking. Otherwise it still >> doesnt yet support variety of architectures that other libcs support. given >> now we have kconfig for eglibc too may be it fills in the nommu gap much >> like uclibc does today. > > The non-MMU gap? Last time I looked, musl didn't had support for any > non-MMU architecture. yes it does not. I meant to state the reverse that mmu-less systems is where uclibc will have edge left. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-f171.google.com (mail-ig0-f171.google.com [209.85.213.171]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016D36DA6E for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 21:49:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ig0-f171.google.com with SMTP id hl1so1077989igb.16 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:49:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=8uYB0twroHy5xyfWMoeMl90LnA/J8Q/XaoZbrEbQ9h8=; b=bzU72nY4tGqejyc6g9GMp5ekYIVPFytvtsFK7n1z/pH/2SCISDKAtScuhe4p3Aie0r ug6Swj26MQxW4u2/DGoJAonW1aJBbAYIkEHPBO+5BYNGTTe69cpLcNWRuUSNcyEwgkib 7VYsP0o4/2FGK08FtwxG/1cUDJs7RNk28y5PCHtn/u3O5PoUkLC3ZxoLSf3dfeDIyci1 mv64ZmkY8oD6TieCCiqVSY4YprfHINn0Yq0kNuNADCPnS2iVOYXlkW09fb+wLTa28pRn iL5Xnd8ShTGTqNqL/HFCgiWlLc6aLEmLK0L6m94ZNmTDoEYtQWisc51kijRRjLBKtE5c VErA== X-Received: by 10.42.16.199 with SMTP id q7mr63149348ica.16.1395870598641; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:49:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.224.136 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:49:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140326174829.5d897f11@skate> References: <20140326174829.5d897f11@skate> From: Khem Raj Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:49:28 -0700 Message-ID: To: Thomas Petazzoni Cc: Yocto discussion list , openembedded-core Subject: Re: [yocto] OpenEmbedded and musl-libc X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 21:50:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Dear Khem Raj, > > On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 11:22:24 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > >> it has been under my radar for a while. I have actually locally made >> toolchains with >> clang+musl and it seems to be coming along. its licensed differently thats >> the biggest attraction for folks who do static linking. Otherwise it still >> doesnt yet support variety of architectures that other libcs support. given >> now we have kconfig for eglibc too may be it fills in the nommu gap much >> like uclibc does today. > > The non-MMU gap? Last time I looked, musl didn't had support for any > non-MMU architecture. yes it does not. I meant to state the reverse that mmu-less systems is where uclibc will have edge left.