Hi Cristian, On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 15:35 +0100, Cristian Cadar wrote:
> However, if the latest available uClibC version is from 2012, I think we > should investigate switching to other libC implementations. This sounds reasonable. > I see there is a fork of uClibc which is maintained, so this would be > one option: > http://tests.embedded-test.org/uClibc-ng/ > > I heard good things about musl too: > https://www.musl-libc.org/ > I believe Martin has tried it with KLEE. For the last few days I've been playing with musl. I can compile it to LLVM IR, at least I believe I managed to do that. The next step I have in mind is to compile a program against the musl implementation, and not the default GNU implementation. That seems to be non-trivial, especially in a setting where I'm compiling to LLVM IR, and not native code. I will keep you posted. In case I get it running, that will be great. I'll also take a look at uClibc-ng. -- Regards, Marko Dimjašević <ma...@cs.utah.edu> . University of Utah https://dimjasevic.net/marko . PGP key ID: 1503F0AA Learn email self-defense! https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ klee-dev mailing list klee-dev@imperial.ac.uk https://mailman.ic.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/klee-dev
