Why have any glibc? GCC et al. work fine compiled against musl (as proven by ex. Alpine only doing musl). Or is it for running on GNU/Linux systems (can't you statically link the build chain?)?
In any event, that makes no sense. Pretend for a moment that glibc has working DNS and musl doesn't have working DNS (not true, but let's pretend). You don't build your compiler chain with working DNS support and then use it to build programs without working DNS.
I keep hearing about Zig and the ease of cross-compiling. I have a small C library that I'd like to build for supported platforms, and I'm considering Zig's build system for that purpose.
I think my headline parsing has forever been ruined since I thought for sure someone created a 313 million parameter cross compiling fine tune
After opening the linked page, I still don't have any idea what the number is in the headline, nor why it's important
Three hundred and thirteen-point-three megabytes is how I parsed it, but I'm not sure of the significance of that either.
The only part of the page source with the substring "313" present is some SVG path. Maybe the automatic headline extractor went too far.
Why "`GNU` cross-tools"? I see no affiliation with the GNU project, no GPL licence. That's misleading.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40282810
I do "crossdev --target armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabihf" instead, and portage will keep it updated until uninstalled.
GCC toolchain glibc-linked binaries with musl libraries and headers, including musl dynamic loader
Out of the glibc tarpit
> glibc-linked binaries with musl libraries
Why have any glibc? GCC et al. work fine compiled against musl (as proven by ex. Alpine only doing musl). Or is it for running on GNU/Linux systems (can't you statically link the build chain?)?
> Why have any glibc?
Maybe they want dns resolution to work properly
Are you talking about the TCP fallback that musl has also had for 2 years? https://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2023/05/02/1
In any event, that makes no sense. Pretend for a moment that glibc has working DNS and musl doesn't have working DNS (not true, but let's pretend). You don't build your compiler chain with working DNS support and then use it to build programs without working DNS.
Does a compiler need to resolve DNS?
What's different from https://toolchains.bootlin.com/ ?
Or using Zig?
> including musl dynamic loader
Does this mean useful interfaces like PAM and nsswitch work on musl now?
PAM has worked on musl for many years. musl-nscd has provided nsswitch functionality for about a decade now.
These days, it just makes sense to use the Zig toolchain instead.
I keep hearing about Zig and the ease of cross-compiling. I have a small C library that I'd like to build for supported platforms, and I'm considering Zig's build system for that purpose.
Also, there is Dyne musl: https://dyne.org/musl/