From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 10686 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2021 22:02:51 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 20 Aug 2021 22:02:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 12229 invoked by uid 550); 20 Aug 2021 22:02:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 12211 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2021 22:02:49 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dereferenced.org; s=mailbun; t=1629496957; bh=Rsupul9PuXcdpItA8OZze0j05DBUt3dfdVnHePLCy+I=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Ikep361kd5STSqSGsoVHqP9bUumhAfCIVrJfqkcjKZIHsGxx++b+4J7q9lY5iaMMT 0F66l8ARLazvZhmRNOIswiSFxeCB09UqaMQ9TuaaPFwluCDs6EreyrylQQJKXgLUUE S2YbCc8pMo4/hTIN0eH8C1lV1jMc4+X0xOxIOpFSnbLDTFpFs5HjVK2f74LXesuIjm JWvMfS5q/fq4QuThT9MO/cJIaEXZIWOsZAq0qSIDEZiKPsv36o2GtLq3RSLtkFU+Y0 BWl+ucq2fJCLXzopwhqixlPCyxBbg53RdCMlY5WoG6cYJzhLRP/PLAL1tJ6EIzeDbL N7KPoXIKsEIQA== Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 17:02:34 -0500 (CDT) From: Ariadne Conill To: musl@lists.openwall.com In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <89784f4-2192-405c-daa7-9eb3839e4ad0@dereferenced.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-1810948165-1629496956=:44151" Subject: Re: [musl] Is systemd in scope for musl? This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-1810948165-1629496956=:44151 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Hi, On Fri, 20 Aug 2021, Olivier Galibert wrote: >   Hi, > > I'm trying to build a kinda-distribution of linux on arm64 where all the userspace is done with clang and which uses systemd[1].  I can either use glibc or musl.  Glibc aggressively does not want to > be compiled by anything else than gcc.  Musl is missing a bunch of stuff systemd wants. There is actually ongoing work in glibc to allow compilation with clang, and linking with lld. > I have two possibilities, either make glibc work but not contribute the changes (because I don't want to give my copyright to the fsf[2]) or extend musl until it has all the missing APIs and > contribute them.  I'd rather do the latter. You no longer need to assign your copyright to the FSF to have code included in GCC or glibc since August 1. > Some APIs (qsort_r) are clearly going to be added in the future.  Others are very glibc, e.g. printf configurability stuff, and do not come from any standard.  So, is "this API is used by systemd" a > good enough reason to accept it as in-scope for musl[3] or will there be things that are "never" going to be accepted? No, "this API is used by ________" is not sufficient scope for inclusion of functionality in musl. The functions themselves must be justified on its own merit, e.g. with an example usecase highlighting why they are helpful. Ariadne --0-1810948165-1629496956=:44151--