3 ms·
While better security is a goal of relibc it is not actually one of the primary goals. Most existing libc implementations are not particularly portable across
by dralley 9y ago
While better security is a goal of relibc it is not actually one of the primary goals.
Most existing libc implementations are not particularly portable across different kernels, and especially not to microkernels such as Redox OS. The goal is to have a standard library that is easier for the Redox OS devs to develop in (obviously, Rust makes sense here), and not so tied down to one kernel like musl is for example.
- shmerl 9y agoWill Rust be able to switch to it completely as to cut out relying on glibc on Linux for example?
- jackpot51 9y agoYes, that would be possible.
- thristian 9y agoThere are important reasons why Rust should continue to use glibc by default, but the Rust compiler already supports musl libc on Linux, so glibc is not required.
- shmerl 9y ago> here are important reasons why Rust should continue to use glibc by default To be more compatible with system code?
- comex 9y agoThat’s one reason. Another is NSS: http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Name-Service-Switch.html http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Name-Servi... It’s a mechanism in glibc for loading dynamic libraries at runtime (based on a config file) to handle DNS and some other things. Anything statically linked can’t support this, which can cause issues with some setups.