Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 15:20:33 +0530
From: Raphael Cohn <>
Subject: Re: What would make musl 1.2?

Do they use a third party support lib?

If it's possible to support use cases with a third party lib, then I'm less
concerned - provided that that lib also works with musl. Given the nature
of ucontext, that may not be so. A musl native solution would be optimal
for performance - and performance is a common reason for going down this
route. It allows for far greater scale in certain server designs then
either thread-per-connection or a thread-pool can do.

Out of interest, how many packages are in the OpenBSD repository? How does
it compare to Debian's, say? For me, Debian's repo contents is a yardstick
of what Linux + Musl could be expected to work with.

On 13 February 2015 at 15:08, Anthony J. Bentley <> wrote:

> Raphael Cohn writes:
> > Is there any possibility of adding in the ucontext.h functions? I know
> > they're deprecated, but they're still widely used - particularly by go
> for
> > goroutines, IIRC.
> It's worth mentioning that OpenBSD doesn't have ucontext, so given the
> size of its package repository (which also contains Go), ucontext can't
> be *that* widely used.
> --
> Anthony J. Bentley

Content of type "text/html" skipped

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.