[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFipMOHfS8=YHqh68uMNW4_fRJ_=rLLSyDucKCctwRjmE2ufZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 11:11:17 -0400
From: LM <lmemsm@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Will musl work as a lsb alternative? (was Re: re:
musl setup attempt)
On 3/27/13, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net> wrote:
> The size penalty using something like uClibc or musl is fairly small,
> and
> the need to dlopen() things to make network resolution work are glibc
> bugs
> that don't apply to other C libraries.
That is one thing I really like about the glibc alternatives.
> I have prebuilt uClibc toolchains at http://landley.net/aboriginal/bin
> (the
> cross-compiler-$ARCH.tar.bz2 files) if you want to try that. Add the
> "bin"
> subdirectory of that tarball to your $PATH and use CROSS_COMPILE=$ARCH-
> as
> your prefix (and yes you need the trailing dash on the prefix name or
> it'll
> try to use i686cc instead of i686-cc).
Think I'll give things a try with musl first. (I really like the
friendly licensing with musl.) Even though I intend to supply all
source code for the project I'm working on, my personal preference is
toward MIT and BSD licensing over LGPL and GPL when it's available. I
have done some building of source with uClibc in the past and I
appreciate your mentioning it in this context. That does give a third
alternative (besides musl and lsbcc/lsbc++). Thank you very much for
the link to the toolchain.
> Really: significant effort to avoid static linking -- not worth it.
Sta.li has a great article on this ( http://sta.li/faq ) that I really
like. It was definitely one of the options I was considering for my
project.
Thanks for the comments and suggestions.
Sincerely,
Laura
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
