[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 11:18:20 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Broken silent glibc-specific assumptions uncovered by musl
* Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> [2013-05-17 13:37:10 -0400]:
> Making wrong assumptions about fsync and fdatasync. (I'm not familiar
> with this issue so somebody else will have to fill it in.)
apparently i didn't remember this correctly it's
just an old-linux vs new-linux break:
linux used to implement fsync,O_SYNC with the
same guarantees as fdatasync,O_DSYNC, so many
applications use fsync when they actually mean
fdatasync (faster, no mtime sync)
then some filesystems started to support O_SYNC
properly with a new flag, but it took some time
to trickle down as distros often use older libc
(where the O_DSYNC and O_SYNC definition was the
same so even on new kernel the applications kept
getting the old flag, hence i remembered it as
a libc issue: when i first tried musl on some
storage application it was significantly slower
due to this difference)
other runtime differences:
- "%Ld" instead of "%lld" as mentioned by sh4rm4 on irc
- lfs64 problems: eg printing off_t with "%d"
- serializing abi incompatible structures with (char*) cast
- relying on some locale specific behaviour (LC_NUMERIC)
- /proc fs issue with writev in musl stdio
- relying on LD_* or other env vars for glibc or the loader
- relying on /etc/* files used by glibc or the loader
- dlopen with RTLD_LAZY
- timezone files are not yet supported in musl
- crypt sha2 with long key input
- using constructors with priority gcc extension
- relying on the random generator algorithm to be the same
- musl's err does not print __progname, it might annoy one
- musl have some stubs
- ppc double-double long double
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.
