[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <em4bfbb908-f61f-4439-bd85-8928fe240378@010b6d78.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 17:23:49 +0000
From: "Laurent Bercot" <ska-dietlibc@...rnet.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: ITT: Nothing but a bunch of excuses and no solutions
>Translated: our code is an uncommented, disorganized mess and we love it.
Hmmm.
Would you kindly give us a pointer to *your* code, so we can go study
it
and learn from what is doubtlessly a paragon of clarity, cleanliness and
and well-commentedness?
>Translated: the end user will need to patch the musl headers to stop defining custom, bespoke, incompatible versions of kernel structures and just include the damn kernel header files so that their system will actually build properly.
You do, of course, realize that the initial reason why some software
has trouble with mixing musl and linux headers is that Linux itself
generally does not favor including kernel headers in userspace, and the
whole uapi system is an ifdef forest that is still, as of today, full
of glibcisms, right?
How long have you been building systems? Because doing wild stuff like
*building a Linux system with another libc* is a piece of cake today.
Back in 2002, it was downright impossible; the ecosystem has made a
lot of progress since.
I would never dare suggest that the obstacles you seem to be bumping
into stem from your own inexperience - not in a million years. However,
now is really a good time to relax and enjoy the relative ease of
building systems, and it is a shame that you do not seem to be relaxing
and enjoying it.
>Maybe you should try building your own Linux distribution so you will get a clue!
This is definitely strange, because I have been building my own systems
with musl for a while now, and I have not experienced half of the
problems
you seem to be running into - and when I have run into obstacles, the
issues were usually with the rest of the software, not with musl.
I wonder why our experiences differ so much. It certainly cannot be a
skill or knowledge issue.
>Translation: the end user will now need to apply heavy patches to his/her system, and/or patch musl 1.2.4 to revert the old behavior, in order to get their damn system to actually build correctly.
This end user disagrees, and wonders why you seem to have so much
difficulty using a computer. Have you tried turning it off and on again?
>Once again: MUSL IS CLEARLY NOT DESIGNED WITH LINUX WORKSTATION USAGE IN MIND!
You know what? You're absolutely right - it is, at least, clearly not
designed with *your* Linux workstation usage in mind. The best path for
you is clearly to write down your musl usage attempt as a failure, and
give it up entirely. You should go back to using glibc, which will be
much easier, and you can make their mailing-list benefit from your
insightful, constructive, and heart-warming comments!
There is no reason for you to keep interacting with a community that
does not understand your genius or address your so eloquently worded
concerns. We're not worthy of your presence, you should leave us to
our mediocrity.
--
Laurent
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.
