Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 20:12:58 +0530
From: Weldon Goree <>
Subject: Re: Packaging: Slackware

On 07/21/2014 07:45 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> Yes. I'm still not clear though on whether the intent is to provide an
> environment for musl-[dynamic-]linked programs running on Slackware,
> or more for a development environment using the musl-gcc wrapper. This
> might affect the stability requirements. Of course if it's just a
> development environment using the wrapper, there may not be a lot of
> point in packaging that since you already need a compiler to use it,

The intent is to provide a build script that builds a musl environment
that one could then use to build other build scripts in the repository
(James B's description was good). I'm trying to get some anecdata on
what the people who mentioned being interested in a musl build script
want (cross toolchain vs. gcc wrapper with some environment setup vs.
just the library itself).

The point of making a build script in the trivial case is that it
integrates it (in a predictable way) with slackware's package
management/file finding system ("where did I put the cross-x86 version's
files again?", etc.).


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.