3 ms·
There's something to be said about swapping the glibc with musl and just hoping for the best. Maybe there's other musl oddities which will cause issues in Alpin
by dragontamer 4y ago
There's something to be said about swapping the glibc with musl and just hoping for the best. Maybe there's other musl oddities which will cause issues in Alpine Linux?
I think its fair to say that most Linux developers test on glibc. Now I hear of some programs using ulibc or so forth (ex: Busybox) where space / embedded is key... but that's a purposeful choice with tradeoffs.
But for a general application... is there really any reason to port off of glibc?
- shp0ngle 4y agoYou get a static library that always works on myriads of distros. You can more easily cross-compile. When you want to cross-compile for Linux on macOS, or crosscompile for arm on intel, much simpler to use musl.
- Gordonjcp 4y agoI honestly think it's worth testing how your code builds against musl, if you think it's likely to be something that ends up in Docker.