From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/359 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "gs@int3.at" Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: musl path Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 01:34:18 +0200 Message-ID: <4E3F20FA.8000400@int3.at> References: <589f298577c7ae68a4e66f1b6f2ee488@smtp1.ispfr.net> <20110806162803.GX29562@port70.net> <20110806202736.GE132@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1312759802 8861 80.91.229.12 (7 Aug 2011 23:30:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 23:30:02 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-360-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Aug 08 01:29:55 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QqCn5-000774-5T for gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 01:29:55 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 18301 invoked by uid 550); 7 Aug 2011 23:29:54 -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 18293 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2011 23:29:54 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110221 SUSE/3.1.8 Mail/1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110806202736.GE132@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:359 Archived-At: > By the way, I'm thinking of moving the gcc wrapper to a separate > repository/tarball along with improving it, at some point in the near > future. I don't really like the clutter of having it > distributed/installed with musl, and as a separate standalone tool I > could make it work with uclibc and other libcs as well.. > > I'd welcome comments from users who like or dislike this idea. improving the wrapper and supporting additional libc's sounds like a good thing. tho having the wrapper automatically installed with the right paths set is also good. i'd continue providing the wrapper with musl for now, since a newer version of the wrapper may not be compatible with an older musl version. also new users would have to configure two things instead of one.