[yocto] [OE-core] OpenEmbedded and musl-libc

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Dear Seth Bollinger,

On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 08:26:08 -0500, Seth Bollinger wrote:

> > I saw that yesterday too and thought it could be interesting for
> > Yocto.  I'm curious as to why it's better than uclibc though
> > (genuinely curious, I know little about uclibc beyond "it's smaller").
> 
> It been a while since I've reviewed uclibc, but doesn't it break a lot of
> software with its vfork only paradigm?

I'm not sure where you have seen that uClibc has vfork() only paradigm,
but it's not correct. uClibc has a proper fork() implementation on all
MMU-equipped CPU architectures that uClibc support. Only the non-MMU
architectures are limited to vfork(). The originality of uClibc here is
probably precisely the fact that it supports non-MMU architectures,
which many other C libraries do not.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com