Hi,
Thomas Petazzoni wrote,
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 15:25:20 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
> > These "ng" names are not the best idea.
> >
> > Maybe uclibc-ng can just supersede uclibc?
>
> Waldemar proposed many, many times to Bernhard to take over the
> project, and Bernhard
Hello,
On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 15:25:20 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> These "ng" names are not the best idea.
>
> Maybe uclibc-ng can just supersede uclibc?
Waldemar proposed many, many times to Bernhard to take over the
project, and Bernhard essentially never replied. So it was either
adding -ng
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Thomas Petazzoni
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
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
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 8:48 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>> Now, the good news - musl has smaller data!
>> 6695 bytes versus 7129 bytes for uclibc:
>>
>>text data bss dechex filename
>> 894902 465 6664 902031 dc38f busybox.uclibc
>> 912538 563 6132 919233
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 07:43:39PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> As uclibc is increasingly aging, I am finally forced
> to switch to musl: I'm bitten by a nasty bug in
> getopt() - hush is using it in a slightly unusual way,
> which uclibc does not expect.
While I'm glad musl is working for you,
Am 14.08.2017 um 19:43 schrieb Denys Vlasenko:
As uclibc is increasingly aging, I am finally forced
to switch to musl: I'm bitten by a nasty bug in
getopt() - hush is using it in a slightly unusual way,
which uclibc does not expect.
I built a toolchain using
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Denys Vlasenko
wrote:
> Only a few options did not build:
> EXTRA_COMPAT and FEATURE_VI_REGEX_SEARCH
> failed because they need GNU regexp extensions.
I have a patch somewhere that enable parts of VI_REGEX_SEARCH (it only
does forward
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
On 8/14/17, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> As uclibc is increasingly
As uclibc is increasingly aging, I am finally forced
to switch to musl: I'm bitten by a nasty bug in
getopt() - hush is using it in a slightly unusual way,
which uclibc does not expect.
I built a toolchain using
https://github.com/richfelker/musl-cross-make
(Rich, is this the thing I should
10 matches
Mail list logo