All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk>
To: "Burton, Ross" <ross.burton@intel.com>
Cc: Yocto discussion list <yocto@yoctoproject.org>,
	openembedded-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [OE-core] OpenEmbedded and musl-libc
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANyK_8c2Vvm3cpdHts+ORCOFizsvKYk7trMVHTBfr2wPecV4QQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJTo0Las0o_JcsvW-X+L=EQAvUf3yVVQBunoCi=cAzR=3y2DrA@mail.gmail.com>

On 21 March 2014 13:10, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
> On 21 March 2014 12:34, Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk> wrote:
>> I'm currently very busy between various projects so I don't have time
>> to hack together a musl-libc recipe myself but I should have time to
>> help test it.
>
> I saw that yesterday too and thought it could be interesting for
> Yocto.  I'm curious as to why it's better than uclibc though
> (genuinely curious, I know little about uclibc beyond "it's smaller").
>
> Ross

Looking at what they say: Better standards compliance, different
license, better for static linking, full UTF-8 support, strong
fail-safe guarantees.

I am taking that at face value as I haven't really done my own
comparison of glibc/uclibc/musl. I've been following the news of musl
development for a while though and I like the direction they're
heading in.

Thanks,

-- 
Paul Barker

Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk
http://www.paulbarker.me.uk


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk>
To: "Burton, Ross" <ross.burton@intel.com>
Cc: Yocto discussion list <yocto@yoctoproject.org>,
	openembedded-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: OpenEmbedded and musl-libc
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANyK_8c2Vvm3cpdHts+ORCOFizsvKYk7trMVHTBfr2wPecV4QQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJTo0Las0o_JcsvW-X+L=EQAvUf3yVVQBunoCi=cAzR=3y2DrA@mail.gmail.com>

On 21 March 2014 13:10, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
> On 21 March 2014 12:34, Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk> wrote:
>> I'm currently very busy between various projects so I don't have time
>> to hack together a musl-libc recipe myself but I should have time to
>> help test it.
>
> I saw that yesterday too and thought it could be interesting for
> Yocto.  I'm curious as to why it's better than uclibc though
> (genuinely curious, I know little about uclibc beyond "it's smaller").
>
> Ross

Looking at what they say: Better standards compliance, different
license, better for static linking, full UTF-8 support, strong
fail-safe guarantees.

I am taking that at face value as I haven't really done my own
comparison of glibc/uclibc/musl. I've been following the news of musl
development for a while though and I like the direction they're
heading in.

Thanks,

-- 
Paul Barker

Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk
http://www.paulbarker.me.uk


  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-03-21 14:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-21 12:34 OpenEmbedded and musl-libc Paul Barker
2014-03-21 13:10 ` [OE-core] " Burton, Ross
2014-03-21 13:10   ` Burton, Ross
2014-03-21 13:26   ` [OE-core] " Seth Bollinger
2014-03-21 13:26     ` [yocto] " Seth Bollinger
2014-03-26 16:44     ` [OE-core] " Thomas Petazzoni
2014-03-21 14:37   ` Paul Barker [this message]
2014-03-21 14:37     ` Paul Barker
2014-03-26 16:46     ` [OE-core] " Thomas Petazzoni
2014-03-21 13:42 ` Kevyn-Alexandre Paré
2014-03-21 16:16   ` Kevyn-Alexandre Paré
2014-03-21 18:22 ` [OE-core] " Khem Raj
2014-03-21 18:22   ` Khem Raj
2014-03-21 19:41   ` [OE-core] " Paul Barker
2014-03-21 19:41     ` Paul Barker
2014-03-26 16:48   ` [OE-core] " Thomas Petazzoni
2014-03-26 21:49     ` Khem Raj
2014-03-26 21:49       ` [yocto] " Khem Raj

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CANyK_8c2Vvm3cpdHts+ORCOFizsvKYk7trMVHTBfr2wPecV4QQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=paul@paulbarker.me.uk \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=ross.burton@intel.com \
    --cc=yocto@yoctoproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.