Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 06:29:16 +0200 From: Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@...nadk.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Re: bbox: musl versus uclibc Hi, Jorge Almeida wrote, > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Thomas Petazzoni > <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:59:41 -0500, wdlkmpx wrote: > > > > >> The project has been badly managed.. thats the only reason i can think > > > > uClibc-ng is alive at https://uclibc-ng.org/. Regular releases > > (actually more regular than musl in recent months!), updated web site, > > responsive maintainer, lots of cleanup in the code base, and QA effort. > > > > I just visited the link you provided. I was curious to know whether to > compile a program one still has to "make menuconfig", which IMO is > fine for the linux kernel. So I clicked the "Documentation" link. It > leads to an "Overview over different language related features". > > What did I do wrong? Nothing. I updated the page now. A valid config is still required to build a uClibc-ng toolchain. You can avoid this by just using Buildroot, Crosstool-ng or OpenADK, which all have good uClibc-ng toolchain support. best regards Waldemar
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.