From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/7017 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Raphael Cohn Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: What would make musl 1.2? Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 14:59:36 +0530 Message-ID: References: <20150213074603.GA975@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c17b9807bdfe050ef4e02b X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1423819808 11264 80.91.229.3 (13 Feb 2015 09:30:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 09:30:08 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-7030-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Fri Feb 13 10:29:58 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YMCZQ-0000nM-LQ for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 10:29:56 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 5539 invoked by uid 550); 13 Feb 2015 09:29:54 -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 5501 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2015 09:29:48 -0000 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=VsTOPj5qCDZvtO3xvj5rbsVj978Q0G5ChZmwm5rX/bo=; b=MGI5FSDGs3+0SsuipQh6Zf244StBjPhLGcTBfAoKu9nVbjqxzvc0d0DHlGKcu9Z62+ d7d6HaEDUVxqS9Ggk8yp2GWLWJizhxePiR0NMU5niuApDdePMIkmpY/rysAkQ+IF2nsV i6bNXlzp+QwWxugSLZHO8h3avb8u0dOti7ag8rp5PKrPq2uWZpHIt9L/JNZqi7OdRn7f WRlewt8e3AWPsUWE2UA1XUF5IjaTRKRGItRpA/uBqe6/+717wrY5mNq3rT/cy6SgC86B 7aFX8YDuSEXkfZt3JApKhS18RglT/+NEAiyzNmzodEvtUiWx0KXKJXhkJiezfSrEZwOp XVlQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnhsHnoonHF95QpQdkQIX5OWl8SlzFfovhkJ5kJZCW/RLWx2uu9GLXgOxz1WFBEFptlfovJ X-Received: by 10.202.195.68 with SMTP id t65mr5289577oif.105.1423819776958; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 01:29:36 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [117.223.141.113] In-Reply-To: <20150213074603.GA975@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:7017 Archived-At: --001a11c17b9807bdfe050ef4e02b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Is there any possibility of adding in the ucontext.h functions? I know they're deprecated, but they're still widely used - particularly by go for goroutines, IIRC. I realise there are problems correctly implementing the *_r variants, but a well-written, modern and efficient implementation would be a big win. On 13 February 2015 at 13:16, Rich Felker wrote: > We're far enough along in the 1.1.x series now that I'd like to start > thinking about what milestones might justify calling a release 1.2.0. > > Looking at the Open Issues and Roadmap on the wiki, the big things > musl could gain in the near future look to be: > > - Finishing up all the loose ends on locale and multilingual support: > IDN, message translations, iconv improvements, collation, and > possibly the byte-based C locale. > > - Hardening/security features. > > - C++11 non-POD TLS. > > - Alternate user/group db backends (hopefully in upcoming 1.1.7). > > Any or all of these could become part of the wishlist for 1.2. > > Aside from those big functionality areas though, I think archs/porting > might be one of the most important things to think about. Supporting > aarch64 is definitely important in the near future, and it could be a > big publicity boost. So could getting coverage for the remaining archs > uClibc has that musl doesn't, or at least the ones of modern interest. > > Other ideas? > > Rich > --001a11c17b9807bdfe050ef4e02b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Is there any possibility of add= ing in the ucontext.h functions? I know they're deprecated, but they= 9;re still widely used - particularly by go for goroutines, IIRC. I realise= there are problems correctly implementing the *_r variants, but a well-wri= tten, modern and efficient implementation would be a big win.

=
On 13 February 2015 a= t 13:16, Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> wrote:
We're far enough along in the 1.1.x series now that I= 'd like to start
thinking about what milestones might justify calling a release 1.2.0.

Looking at the Open Issues and Roadmap on the wiki, the big things
musl could gain in the near future look to be:

- Finishing up all the loose ends on locale and multilingual support:
=C2=A0 IDN, message translations, iconv improvements, collation, and
=C2=A0 possibly the byte-based C locale.

- Hardening/security features.

- C++11 non-POD TLS.

- Alternate user/group db backends (hopefully in upcoming 1.1.7).

Any or all of these could become part of the wishlist for 1.2.

Aside from those big functionality areas though, I think archs/porting
might be one of the most important things to think about. Supporting
aarch64 is definitely important in the near future, and it could be a
big publicity boost. So could getting coverage for the remaining archs
uClibc has that musl doesn't, or at least the ones of modern interest.<= br>
Other ideas?

Rich

--001a11c17b9807bdfe050ef4e02b--