[OE-core] musl thoughts
Adrian Bunk
bunk at stusta.de
Sat Mar 23 21:16:04 UTC 2019
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 03:18:01PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>...
> There are certain design aspects of musl which are actually turning
> out to be good
> e.g. there is no __MUSL__ define, so non-portable code can not be
> hidden which is a good thing,
>...
Please take a closer look at some of the musl changes to NM that made
upgrading NM so hard for Andreas.
+#if defined(__GLIBC__)
#include <net/ethernet.h>
+#else /* musl libc */
+#define ETH_ALEN 6 /* Octets in one ethernet addr */
+#endif
Using __GLIBC__ in workarounds for bugs in musl is wrong,
and cannot be upstreamed since it would do the wrong thing
on other non-broken C libraries.
> While the eyes may hurt
> to see them, it does serve a
> good reminder of whats needed for a given package.
>...
Who is responsible for fixing the root causes of such bugs in musl,
so that the workaround patches can be dropped from packages like NM?
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
More information about the Openembedded-core
mailing list