Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 21:46:40 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Best place to discuss other lightweight libraries? On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 07:54:55PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > On 04/22/2013 06:31:10 PM, Rich Felker wrote: > >On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 06:24:06PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > >> Many moons ago I started a thread on here (or was it on freenode?) > >> asking about lightweight alternatives to stuff and the need for a > >> wiki page tracking them. > >> > >> I believe that at the time, the musl wiki was insufficiently > >> combobulated, but it has since been fixed. The > >> http://busybox.net/tinyutils.html page is old is stale and never > >> really had good coverage, http://elinux.org/System_Size is sort of > >> adjacent to the topic. If we do come up with anything, can we put it > >> on a wiki page? > > > >That would be a perfectly acceptable topic for the wiki. > > Obviously I'd nominate toybox. (And busybox.) If only so you have a > context for "ok, what do these NOT cover". Of course. My proposed criteria would just be: 1. Must be free software. 2. Duplicates a significant portion of the usage cases of a program or library that's widely perceived as bloated or otherwise problematic for systems musl might be used on, in a way that fixes some or all of these problems. Reasons other than bloat might be waking up every second to eat battery (non-Busybox ntpd does this!), requiring dynamic linking, etc. 3. Non-criterion: the software doesn't have to be perfect or lack any bloat problems itself; it just has to be better than the mainstream solution in at least one way that might be significant to our users. 4. Not by Lennart Poettering. :-) Does this sound reasonable? > There's an existing "musl vs uClibc" page but we might want a > sentence or two on "musl: obviously the best", "uClibc: tried really > hard but buildroot squished it in 2005 and it never recovered". > "dietlibc: widely mocked for not-a-but-thats-a-feature disease", > "klibc: official libc of the postminimalist art movement".) If such changes are going to be made, I think they should be done by somebody who's not going to word them in that way... :-) > "There's always room for dropbear". And polarssl, and so on. cyassl looked promising too. I would probably mention tomcrypt too even though it's not sufficient to do SSL; it has the most slim, clean, portable implementations of crypto algorithms I've seen. > I know we discussed more stuff (rxvt, xcfe and lxde...) These are a bit more borderline, but I wouldn't call them unacceptable. 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.