[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191108185106.GG16318@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:51:06 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: openembedded-core@...ts.openembedded.org
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com, raj.khem@...il.com
Subject: Re: OpenEmbedded systemd+musl patch status
On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 01:43:37PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> Some questions came up on #musl about systemd and musl
> [non-]compatibility, and whether any of the patches being applied are
> problematic/buggy, so I'm doing a quick review of my take on each,
> from the list here:
>
> https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/tree/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_243.bb#n31
> https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/tree/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd
>
>
>
> 0002-don-t-use-glibc-specific-qsort_r.patch
>
> This looks ok-ish for now. It's not "musl specific" because qsort_r is
> not a standard function and historical implementations differ in the
> argument order, which is why musl has it -- lack of consensus over
~~~~~~ ??
> something like this is a strong criterion for exclusion. I've been
Something got lost in my thought process or typing here. The intended
meaning is something like "which is why musl has not yet included it".
Rich
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.
