From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5196 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: u-igbb@aetey.se Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: musl 1.0.x branch Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 21:39:20 +0200 Message-ID: <20140606193920.GF6051@example.net> References: <20140606175617.GA3914@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1402083595 27567 80.91.229.3 (6 Jun 2014 19:39:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 19:39:55 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-5201-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Fri Jun 06 21:39:49 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WszzQ-0002oK-Af for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2014 21:39:48 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 5612 invoked by uid 550); 6 Jun 2014 19:39:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 5604 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2014 19:39:47 -0000 X-T2-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 Received-SPF: none receiver=mailfe09.swip.net; client-ip=178.254.39.32; envelope-from=u-igbb@aetey.se Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140606175617.GA3914@brightrain.aerifal.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:5196 Archived-At: On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 01:56:17PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > I'm about to prepare the 1.0.3 release, and I've been thinking a bit > about the future of the 1.0.x branch. Specifically I'd like to gauge > the extent to which it's being used. So far cherry-picking fixes to it For us (the "Dapty" software repository at Aetey) there is no such thing as a "system-wide-version of the c library", neither any corresponding upgrade barrier whatsoever. >From this point of view, given the ABI stability a single supported branch (in such a case "trunk") is fully sufficient. Thanks for musl, it is a pleasure to build against it. Rune