Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:27:52 +0200 From: "Arvid E. Picciani" <aep@...s.org> To: <musl@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/10] GLIBC ABI patches On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 20:33:31 +0200, Igmar Palsenberg wrote: > I've seen lots of code who use internal glibc functions / data > structures. We want to prevent them from being used, that's why I > personally have a problem with adding code like this. Unless it > actually serves a real use. That was sort of the point of making it an alias, i think. Code that uses it still doesn't compile, but if it was compiled with gnulibc headers it at least links against musl. This satisfies both requirements of "musl should encourage standards compliance" and "musl should be able to run nvidia drivers" I just want it to also satisfy "musl code should serve as reference implementation of a standards compliant libc", which it doesnt if gnu compatibility code is mixed in indifferent. -- Arvid E. Picciani
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.