Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:31:09 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Request for comments: website updates? On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 12:55:24PM -0700, Isaac Dunham wrote: > On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 21:01:16 -0400 > Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> wrote: > > > I know a lot of stuff in the musl website is a bit outdated, lacking > > in details, etc. and I'd appreciate some ideas to get it more > > useful/informative between now and the 0.9 release. Website is a GREAT > > bikeshed so come on everybody, have at it.. ;-) > > > Update the comparisons? > IIRC, glibc has dropped the rpc headers and expect a third-party > implementation to be used (tirpc was one, IIRC). > The ABI is still present there. > Sizes for musl are outdated (~575k libc.so, nearly 1.4 MB libc.a here). size(1) and du(1) are very different; the measurements are size(1). And they're actually inflated because I measured my debug build, and size(1) is counting debug info (eh_frame) as code because if this were C++, it would be part of the code... Rich
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.