On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Emil Renner Berthing <syst...@esmil.dk> wrote:
> Around the internet one can read statements such as "systemd
> is designed with glibc in mind" and "the systemd developers' idea
> of a standard libc is one that has bug-for-bug compatibility with
> glibc". So in a fit of naivety I decided to test this out and see
> how much work it would take to make systemd work with musl.
>
> The real reason is of course that I'd like to see systemd running
> on my router and other small devices that usually run some OpenWRT
> derivative.
>
> This series makes systemd compile cleanly against musl 1.1.4 with
> a minimal configuration and also fixes a few runtime errors. It is
> only lightly tested and a few of patches could definitely be done
> in a nicer, more generic way. Also I'd love to get even more stuff
> working like eg. networkd and resolved. However I would like some
> early feedback and see if this is something that could one day make
> it upstream or I'm just wasting my time.
>
> The first two patches are not strictly needed, but it makes the
> compilation much quieter and they are correct according POSIX.

In general, I don't think we should add patches for the sole purpose
of non-glibc compatibility. You would in most cases be much better
served by adding the missing functionality to your libc, rather than
to each of the project requiring the functionality.

That said, we are of course happy to take patches that are "the right
thing to do" regardless of which libc is being used, so I merged some
of the patches you posted.

Btw, have you considered simply putting glibc on your router in the
first place? If you can fit systemd, you can probably fit glibc too...

Thanks!

Tom
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel

Reply via email to