Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 14 submissions in the queue.
posted by LaminatorX on Thursday March 20 2014, @01:33PM   Printer-friendly
from the ilibc-ulibc-we-all-C-for-libc dept.

dalias writes

"The musl libc project has released version 1.0, the result of three years of development and testing. Musl is a lightweight, fast, simple, MIT-licensed, correctness-oriented alternative to the GNU C library (glibc), uClibc, or Android's Bionic. At this point musl provides all mandatory C99 and POSIX interfaces (plus a lot of widely-used extensions), and well over 5000 packages are known to build successfully against musl.

Several options are available for trying musl. Compiler toolchains are available from the musl-cross project, and several new musl-based Linux distributions are already available (Sabotage and Snowflake, among others). Some well-established distributions including OpenWRT and Gentoo are in the process of adding musl-based variants, and others (Aboriginal, Alpine, Bedrock, Dragora) are adopting musl as their default libc."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by dr zim on Thursday March 20 2014, @02:46PM

    by dr zim (748) on Thursday March 20 2014, @02:46PM (#18904)

    They've carefully hidden that information on their website.... []

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Informative=4, Total=4
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 1) by Techwolf on Thursday March 20 2014, @09:25PM

    by Techwolf (87) on Thursday March 20 2014, @09:25PM (#19070)

    Whoops, I should been more clear on why I was asking. I was on a tablet device tethered to a phone that was in G?? mode, the slowest mode there is. It would have taken 30 minutes to over an hour to view/read the site linked.

    Besides, old habits die hard. You are not supposed to read the articial. Right? Right?

    I though this site was for ducussions and figure I would get a good answer withen 10 minute or so. As I type this, I see you got +5 and I got -1, wth?! That was a sersious question and got marked flamebait. If I really wanted to troll, I would have come up with something a lot better then that. :-)

    Looks like I will have to get the proper answer tomorrow when I get on a braodband connection.

    • (Score: 1) by dr zim on Friday March 21 2014, @04:19PM

      by dr zim (748) on Friday March 21 2014, @04:19PM (#19358)

      Meh, it's just the internet, nothing to lose sleep over :) FWIW, I took your question as a serious one and started to answer in my own words, but the site had answered it so much better. I should have not tried to be cute about it, but after reading so many 'let me ask the community because I can't be bothered to google' posts in the last few weeks, it was too easy for me to lump your post in with those. Anyway, I hope you got what you wanted from the link. Please don't let a grumpy old ass like me turn you off to the site.

      Peace, /z