> I'd like feedback from people about the possibility of dropping support > for uclibc-ng. If you are unfamiliar, its the successor to uclibc as a > C Standard Library for embedded systems, ie a replacement for glibc > bloat. However, it is inferior to musl which serves the same purpose > and which has now well supported in Gentoo.
> I know people want musl support, but does anyone even care about > uclibc-ng? If not, I can work towards deprecating it and putting what > little time I have towards musl. > Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. > Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] Are you the only Gentoo developer working on musl and uclibc-ng? One thing I might try with a Gentoo uclibc-ng system is convert to musl or glibc using crossdev. >From what I see on the internet, there is more support for musl than >uclibc-ng, and more people working with musl than with uclibc-ng. There is a musl-cross-make cross-toolchain that can be built from non-musl or even non-Linux. https://github.com/richfelker/musl-cross-make >From what I have seen, musl looks more promising than uclibc-ng, and more >user- and developer-friendly. Unless somebody wants to take over uclibc-ng for Gentoo, I say better for you, with your limited time, to drop uclibc-ng in favor of musl. Tom
