From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/12970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Assaf Gordon Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: future of compiler wrappers Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:00:11 -0600 Message-ID: References: <20180702001150.GA28669@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20180702152805.GA26760@voyager> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1530547102 8112 195.159.176.226 (2 Jul 2018 15:58:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 15:58:22 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 To: musl@lists.openwall.com, Markus Wichmann Original-X-From: musl-return-12986-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Jul 02 17:58:18 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fa1DW-00020V-I9 for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:58:18 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 16265 invoked by uid 550); 2 Jul 2018 16:00:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 16237 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2018 16:00:26 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xuav8V0UoH3K++Ql7tyVPckragHM9K2p8xlJBCXlrJg=; b=jNpTuobiBTt1bWJLppb/Zmomfr2We41pYW0zGtQtMAeNSGgnIM6OcUzMx6SzhcIHmM jj9nR1tvN/8Zak4FWACsYXsRzb5eZCY/sQiCvkI+FSESrh8hcVfoQXJJUENQUp9M5N22 HHK2heib1BgDTg2Lh2ijMAzVCUT7hbC+SPAZu2hpgHsbwuRlahPo+QWgif6E5lo4LhYq aD3gXLFLBlQ6wWPL4JpcaArruEDh387fd8o1hkpY36EgsHkdtZbExE/XXxnH66rEor2X LpBl7w+rWDbSV94p/OpG0Wdi7+b1p4xI1O5eUuGi5bcw2MsGMxVX5cVhiXLmsmHCziht 3G7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=xuav8V0UoH3K++Ql7tyVPckragHM9K2p8xlJBCXlrJg=; b=bZsPX2THPFZmv1/Nyo558cMAymJk1E0I9syZllpFLqyg6TsGSB+EImGBENWkHhKXlu IeHAZx3MCH6S1w+NPgBa5Lj4ZnHt0ZOmcSqvozmQu3yqvBthOR5iqcZoSZ/aklqqIZaX z1HO9C5bmu4b2Bb7dDGA+4D9UXJ5U2anRW85NxOsppvWD4rQs3gZLkYLnt/ao3xRUeOc NHYVSTpivaApz5oCZ3AIC6UeDAfmkBpB84hO0sWMM41uKZbMSoA2a1jk5kkyZQPx1t2C 6rrTqGsBwLyPVy4X/+GzWg8BhRz4aeM4K3lZmsG8oY7QumWnJRHPU2Y3XE9tXNg278Ac RSgA== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E22zYqh4MCwpVFPPifWnLKeteK/Ff3sjwYRRp3UxpL6Mx8VUEmm SuQIaFbo6X/ZW92l7O8Fdi1b5zye X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLhfX9xgfDBVLVTbrdHRHn8vSKVyQkHE5pJfSZOxg23M1KmTu/0KCmdPm4UCteQV3fjdu/cxw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:585:: with SMTP id f5-v6mr26539401plf.142.1530547214284; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:00:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180702152805.GA26760@voyager> Content-Language: en-US Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:12970 Archived-At: Hello, On 02/07/18 09:28 AM, Markus Wichmann wrote: > On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 08:11:50PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: >> [...] I expressed a sentiment that the compiler wrapper scripts tend to >> reflect badly on musl, and that I'd really rather not keep maintaining >> them but pass maintainership of them off to someone else as a separate >> project for users who still want to use them. [...] > > By all means, nuke them. Cross-compilers are the way to go in OS > development, as well, and pretty much for the same reason: You want to > insulate your compilate from the host environment. So yes, in the words > of William Shatner: Let them die! A slightly different POV, as someone who is not very familiar with the nitty-gritty of cross-compliation setup: The current setup of having "musl-gcc" with a simple "make install" is invaluable for testing various programs for portability, i.e. it is a clean and easy way to build programs against a different libc, even if the host is using glibc. As a secondary bonus, it also allows building static binaries very easily. Now that is of course the simple case, and I'm only using it on x86-64, but I'm using it alot. I don't know how mips/ppcs and/or cross-compliation complicate things (I understand that they do...). If musl-gcc is gone, I'd guess the next best (easiest) thing is running alpine linux in docker / VM and build locally there? Still not very complicated, but seems like an order of magnitude more demanding than having "musl-gcc". There is ELLCC, but it's been almost a year since the last release - is it being actively maintained? even if so, it requires a heavy compilation phase to setup everything. If "musl-gcc" s relegated to an external package/repository but is still easy to install - great. But if it is completely removed or abandoned, it would be missed... by me at least. I'm sadly not an expert enough on compilers or cross-compliations to maintain it, but I can help with automated testing and bug reporting if it becomes a separate package. regards, - gordon