[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMAJcuB24w8pUKK66YiZUXQNeXxLTXajMvgcGgEYGz2UW1ihZg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 11:59:39 -0600
From: Josiah Worcester <josiahw@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: the case for __MUSL__
On Dec 29, 2014 11:51 AM, "Richard Gorton" <
rcgorton@...nitive-electronics.com> wrote:
>
>
> That is a single example of some of the code in a library which is NOT
musl.
> There are other places in the example library which know about __APPLE__
or __GLIBC__ or __sun__
>
> My thought is to use __MUSL__ in those libraries as appropriate in place
of __<architecture>__ as the backing libc is musl.
>
> And said use of __MUSL__ is what I am interested in feedback about.
>
The intent of not providing it is to force applications to use a portable
interface rather then being libc specific. So, everyone's leaping to try
and find ways to not need that.
Sorry for the mismatched expectations.
Content of type "text/html" skipped
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.
