Re: How to properly give attribution to musl-libc?

[Oliver Schneider <musl-mailinglist@f-prot.com>]

Hi Rich,

On 2014-02-07 01:03, Rich Felker wrote:
> For the technical sake of conformance to the conditions in the
> relevant licenses, I believe it's sufficient to include somewhere with
> the distributed binary (not necessarily in the binary itself; an
> accompanying text file is perfectly reasonable) a statement with the
> copyright and permission notice.
Okay, thanks.

> Of course if you find musl useful and would like to help promote it,
> other things like putting a notice and link on the website, etc. would
> be great. (As an aside, perhaps we should prepare some "powered by
> musl" etc. "button" graphics that websites can display.)
I find it useful as individual and professional, but of course the
decisions to promote it are only up to me as an individual. For anything
else I must ask.

> No, this is actually an FAQ topic. :-)
> 
> http://wiki.musl-libc.org/wiki/FAQ#Q:_why_is_there_no_MUSL_macro_.3F
I know about this one. I read this somewhere on some mailing list
before, when I was searching for Clang support and found that there was
some mentioning of this fact in the glibc or GCC community, don't
remember exactly. Either way, I was first astonished, but after a second
thought it made perfect sense. Conform to the standards and you needn't
provide crutches.

I guess I'll simply define something on the command line for musl-libc
builds. Currently they are only an option, but eventually they're meant
to replace the glibc ones.


Thanks,

// Oliver