On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 5:34 AM, Paul Barker <p...@paulbarker.me.uk> wrote: > Hi all, > > musl-libc hit version 1.0.0 yesterday and is starting to look good to > me. It's basically a really small but very functional libc that would > suit embedded environments very well as an alternative to > eglibc/uclibc. I'm personally very interested in using it in my > projects and I also think it could fit in well with the aims of > poky-tiny. > > http://www.etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html gives some pretty useful info. > > I'm basically emailing to see if anyone else is interested in this or > if anyone has looked at using it before in OpenEmbedded as a google > for previous discussions didn't turn anything up. > > I'm currently very busy between various projects so I don't have time > to hack together a musl-libc recipe myself but I should have time to > help test it.
it has been under my radar for a while. I have actually locally made toolchains with clang+musl and it seems to be coming along. its licensed differently thats the biggest attraction for folks who do static linking. Otherwise it still doesnt yet support variety of architectures that other libcs support. given now we have kconfig for eglibc too may be it fills in the nommu gap much like uclibc does today. I have some plans for 1.7 for adding it to OE may be in a layer of its own first and then migrate it to OE-core > > Thanks, > > -- > Paul Barker > > Email: p...@paulbarker.me.uk > http://www.paulbarker.me.uk > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
