Hello Willy,
On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 12:32:17 +0900, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > just curious > > > > - are those issues not happening in other libc implementation ? (e.g., > > musl-libc) > > - same question to nolibc: is there any possibility that nolibc will > > evolve as glibc does, and this evolution introduces the UML issues ? > > Nolibc focuses on early boot programs. That does not mean it will never > evolve towrards more generic usage but this remains unlikely, and in any > case there's the goal will remain not to degrade the experience on the > original target (early boot). That doesn't mean there will never be any > breakage but we're doing our best to keep things in a clean and workable > state. Regarding threads, it seems unlikely that they'll arrive any time > soon. But if they did, assuming UML would by then be a long established > user, we'd certainly find a solution together (even via build-time > defines if needed). thanks for the detail background of nolibc. I understand nolibc will evolve with the carefully considering the issues we faced with glibc. > Hoping this answers your question. definitely, thanks again. -- Hajime
