From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1365 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Arvid E. Picciani" Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/10] GLIBC ABI patches Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:27:52 +0200 Message-ID: <877da749cbb3a1529ba3363702c98b12@exys.org> References: <20120722181332.191d4fa5@newbook> <20120722183828.20b71c9d@newbook> <72fae6f34ad57662422b87379f3fdf9b@exys.org> <65E116B4-1634-478A-957E-A7B374396614@palsenberg.com> <500EE723.5050003@purdue.edu> <77170945-3310-4E43-A57E-D5B00974DCA0@palsenberg.com> <500EE977.70205@purdue.edu> <794E4E83-2775-4DAF-8FDF-D87936250600@palsenberg.com> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1343206726 27518 80.91.229.3 (25 Jul 2012 08:58:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:58:46 +0000 (UTC) To: Original-X-From: musl-return-1364-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Jul 25 10:58:45 2012 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 1StxQV-000275-9j for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 10:58:39 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 11345 invoked by uid 550); 25 Jul 2012 08:58:36 -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 7588 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2012 07:20:14 -0000 In-Reply-To: <794E4E83-2775-4DAF-8FDF-D87936250600@palsenberg.com> X-Sender: aep@exys.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.5.4 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1365 Archived-At: On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 20:33:31 +0200, Igmar Palsenberg wrote: > I've seen lots of code who use internal glibc functions / data > structures. We want to prevent them from being used, that's why I > personally have a problem with adding code like this. Unless it > actually serves a real use. That was sort of the point of making it an alias, i think. Code that uses it still doesn't compile, but if it was compiled with gnulibc headers it at least links against musl. This satisfies both requirements of "musl should encourage standards compliance" and "musl should be able to run nvidia drivers" I just want it to also satisfy "musl code should serve as reference implementation of a standards compliant libc", which it doesnt if gnu compatibility code is mixed in indifferent. -- Arvid E. Picciani