4 ms·
it says "A more lively project; still, definitely targets systems with a real Linux kernel." but actually people are using Musl for other use cases. And it is B
by justincormack 7y ago
it says "A more lively project; still, definitely targets systems with a real Linux kernel." but actually people are using Musl for other use cases. And it is BSD licensed, and very high quality.
- stefan_ 7y agoOkay, what good is any of that if musl literally does not compile without Linux headers? This is for systems that are at best a small RTOS, and there is no standard for what those operating systems offer to a libc.
- justincormack 7y agoMusl upstream only supports Linux, but it is so easy to port that there are large numbers of ports to non Linux environments.
- digikata 7y agoThere were other considerations against musl there. I'd summarize them as targeting a desktop/server with kernel level system, or at least a mid-to-high end embedded system, has different code, memory, and optimization tradeoffs than the smaller embedded systems that seem to be targeted with picolibc.