[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK1hOcN_uD7zaPFwsq2TZ9E=6+RzzsjRfq8WNReqifJWToS45g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 15:25:20 +0200
From: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
To: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: wdlkmpx <wdlkmpx@...il.com>, busybox <busybox@...ybox.net>,
musl <musl@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: bbox: musl versus uclibc
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:59:41 -0500, wdlkmpx wrote:
>
>> I'm sure there was plenty of people willing to contribute to uclibc,
>> there is even an updated fork.
>>
>> The project has been badly managed.. thats the only reason i can think
>> of for this situation to happen
>
> uClibc-ng is alive at https://uclibc-ng.org/. Regular releases
> (actually more regular than musl in recent months!), updated web site,
> responsive maintainer, lots of cleanup in the code base, and QA effort.
>
> So saying that uClibc is dead is completely incorrect.
These "ng" names are not the best idea.
Maybe uclibc-ng can just supersede uclibc?
We can give www.uclibc.org domain (or the server itself) to it.
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.
