About the support of aarch64

Waldemar Brodkorb wbx at uclibc-ng.org
Wed Mar 15 19:20:33 UTC 2017

Rob Landley wrote,

> On 01/09/2017 08:26 AM, ANDY KENNEDY wrote:
> > Because uClibc is dead.
> As the guy who staged the coup to appoint the current maintainer a
> decade ago and then watched him _not_ get the NPTL mess sorted or the
> project back on a regular release schedule, I agree: uClibc is dead. Has
> been for a while, replaced by musl-libc (chromeos) and bionic (android).
> I wrote a long eulogy for the project last year on the buildroot list
> explaining how it died and why I consider the uClibc-ng project to be
> beating a dead horse:

Yeah, but your opinion is just _one_ opinion.
Keeping a working code base up and running for a lot of
architectures not supported by musl isn't about beating a dead
horse.(ARC, Xtensa, NDS32, Sparc, Blackfin, C6X, H8/300, ..)
uClibc-ng is alive and kicking. So stop telling people bullshit.

>   http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2016-December/180102.html
> Of course that particular exercise in necromancy is no sillier than a
> half-dozen other such projects I could name.

Surely reimplementing a well known project like busybox just because
to use another open source license is something totally useful and
genius stuff.

I added aarchh64 support recently to uClibc-ng, so you might give it
a try and make your own opinion.

best regards

More information about the uClibc mailing list