From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/11822 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Thomas Petazzoni Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general,gmane.linux.busybox Subject: Re: bbox: musl versus uclibc Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 14:34:28 +0200 Organization: Free Electrons Message-ID: <20170816143428.5845c87c@windsurf> References: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1502886893 3650 195.159.176.226 (16 Aug 2017 12:34:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 12:34:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Denys Vlasenko , busybox , musl To: wdlkmpx Original-X-From: musl-return-11835-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Aug 16 14:34:48 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dhxWy-0000Lj-Vf for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 14:34:41 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 30441 invoked by uid 550); 16 Aug 2017 12:34:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 30366 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2017 12:34:41 -0000 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:11822 gmane.linux.busybox:44155 Archived-At: Hello, On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:59:41 -0500, wdlkmpx wrote: > I'm sure there was plenty of people willing to contribute to uclibc, > there is even an updated fork. > > The project has been badly managed.. thats the only reason i can think > of for this situation to happen 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. So saying that uClibc is dead is completely incorrect. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com