On 1/5/21 8:43 AM, Jaco Kroon wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On 2021/01/05 13:08, Thomas Mueller wrote: >>> I'd like feedback from people about the possibility of dropping support >>> for uclibc-ng. If you are unfamiliar, its the successor to uclibc as a >>> C Standard Library for embedded systems, ie a replacement for glibc >>> bloat. However, it is inferior to musl which serves the same purpose >>> and which has now well supported in Gentoo. >>> I know people want musl support, but does anyone even care about >>> uclibc-ng? If not, I can work towards deprecating it and putting what >>> little time I have towards musl. >>> Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. >>> Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] >> Are you the only Gentoo developer working on musl and uclibc-ng?
I'm the only one working on uclibc-ng. There are some people helping with musl, especially the overlay. >> >> One thing I might try with a Gentoo uclibc-ng system is convert to musl or >> glibc using crossdev. >> >> From what I see on the internet, there is more support for musl than >> uclibc-ng, and more people working with musl than with uclibc-ng. It does seem that musl is winning the embedded libc race. >> >> There is a musl-cross-make cross-toolchain that can be built from non-musl >> or even non-Linux. >> >> https://github.com/richfelker/musl-cross-make > > I've used crossdev in the past. It was a nasty experience, but I > believe crossdev in Gentoo is getting better and better, and it supports > many more targets. Yes it is, which is why I'm preparing pre-build stage3's on several arches so you don't have to x-compile. I've done the nasty part for you. > >> From what I have seen, musl looks more promising than uclibc-ng, and more >> user- and developer-friendly. >> >> Unless somebody wants to take over uclibc-ng for Gentoo, I say better for >> you, with your limited time, to drop uclibc-ng in favor of musl. Correct, if I had the time, I'd continue to support both. But my time is limited, so I need to concentrate. I'm just looking for anyone to scream if I'm destroying their world by dropping uclibc-ng. If no one does, then I'll begin the process of removing it from the tree. > > Not doing embedded work at the moment, but just out of hand as of right > now if I had to make a choice I'd definitely look at MUSL as first > choice. So +1 for that suggestion. > > Kind Regards, > Jaco > -- Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] E-Mail : bluen...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA
