Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

Dev.SN ♥ developers

musl libc Reaches 1.0 Milestone

posted by LaminatorX on Thursday March 20 2014, @09:33AM   Printer-friendly
from the ilibc-ulibc-we-all-C-for-libc dept.

dalias writes

"The musl libc project has released version 1.0, the result of three years of development and testing. Musl is a lightweight, fast, simple, MIT-licensed, correctness-oriented alternative to the GNU C library (glibc), uClibc, or Android's Bionic. At this point musl provides all mandatory C99 and POSIX interfaces (plus a lot of widely-used extensions), and well over 5000 packages are known to build successfully against musl.

Several options are available for trying musl. Compiler toolchains are available from the musl-cross project, and several new musl-based Linux distributions are already available (Sabotage and Snowflake, among others). Some well-established distributions including OpenWRT and Gentoo are in the process of adding musl-based variants, and others (Aboriginal, Alpine, Bedrock, Dragora) are adopting musl as their default libc."

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
musl libc Reaches 1.0 Milestone | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 1000 moderator points   | 37 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by dr zim on Thursday March 20 2014, @10:46AM

    by dr zim (748) on Thursday March 20 2014, @10:46AM (#18904)

    They've carefully hidden that information on their website.... http://www.musl-libc.org/intro.html [musl-libc.org]

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Informative=4, Total=4
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   5  

  • (Score: 1) by Techwolf on Thursday March 20 2014, @05:25PM

    by Techwolf (87) on Thursday March 20 2014, @05:25PM (#19070)

    Whoops, I should been more clear on why I was asking. I was on a tablet device tethered to a phone that was in G?? mode, the slowest mode there is. It would have taken 30 minutes to over an hour to view/read the site linked.

    Besides, old habits die hard. You are not supposed to read the articial. Right? Right?

    I though this site was for ducussions and figure I would get a good answer withen 10 minute or so. As I type this, I see you got +5 and I got -1, wth?! That was a sersious question and got marked flamebait. If I really wanted to troll, I would have come up with something a lot better then that. :-)

    Looks like I will have to get the proper answer tomorrow when I get on a braodband connection.

    • (Score: 1) by dr zim on Friday March 21 2014, @12:19PM

      by dr zim (748) on Friday March 21 2014, @12:19PM (#19358)

      Meh, it's just the internet, nothing to lose sleep over :) FWIW, I took your question as a serious one and started to answer in my own words, but the site had answered it so much better. I should have not tried to be cute about it, but after reading so many 'let me ask the community because I can't be bothered to google' posts in the last few weeks, it was too easy for me to lump your post in with those. Anyway, I hope you got what you wanted from the link. Please don't let a grumpy old ass like me turn you off to the site.

      Peace, /z