[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <572672D9.2040409@cox.net>
Date: Sun, 01 May 2016 17:19:21 -0400
From: anonymous <johnandsara2@....net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: musl works in distro x-lsf-2010 - advice of use requested
Hi. I have "new distro* compiling musl" (easy) - should it build pkgs
against it?
http://sourceforge.net/p/x-lfs-2010/
(to build musl-libc, only required "-std=c99" added to CFLAGS, which is
not default for gcc-4.4.5 which is used)
i have gnu libc6 and libc5 fully sourced and compiled (i can't say i'm
too happy with the complexity but they build and run)
QUESTION: Should I try building gnu automake or other packages against
musl-libc and offer the option to build against musl-libc? Or is it
more "no, use musl-libc for NEW embedded projects and leave libc6 libc5
as they are for supporting (2010 era) linux bins"
x-lfs-2010 distro build all from scratch (350+ pkg) hands free
overnight, and the end result need to be runtime libc6 and libc5-compat
to run "unix bins" (ie, bins that would work in either slackware or
debian because they are both unix and i386) and mostly: commercial
mathematica around version 4
sure i could build some pkgs against musl-libc but for the big picture
"what issues am i looking at for musl-libc to act as libc and
libc5-compat" and would musl-libc like to see such a development ?
have a good one!
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.
