Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH next] toolchain/toolchain-buildroot: default to glibc as the C library

From: Romain Naour <romain.naour@gmail.com>
To: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>,
	"Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
Cc: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com>,
	Thomas De Schampheleire <thomas.de_schampheleire@nokia.com>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
	Buildroot List <buildroot@buildroot.org>
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH next] toolchain/toolchain-buildroot: default to glibc as the C library
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 21:35:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fb8ee027-b516-39e6-7029-3286f3961332@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bksjc1ji.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk>

Hello,

Le 16/08/2022 à 23:37, Peter Korsgaard a écrit :
>>>>>> "Yann" == Yann E MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> writes:
> 
>  > Thomas, All,
>  > On 2022-08-15 22:29 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot spake thusly:
>  >> This is perhaps the most controversial change for Buildroot that can
>  >> be written in a two-liner.
>  >> 
>  >> Historically, we have used uClibc as our default C library, as
>  >> Buildroot was created initially as a test-bed for uClibc, and also
>  >> because uClibc made a lot of sense for embedded Linux systems, due to
>  >> its smaller size and fine-grained configurability.
>  >> 
>  >> Since then, the landscape of embedded Linux systems has changed. Even
>  >> though Buildroot happily supports really low-end devices, the vast
>  >> majority of Buildroot users are quite certainly running the resulting
>  >> system on a reasonably powerful platform, with significant amount of
>  >> RAM and storage. In this context, the benefits of uClibc are no longer
>  >> that much relevant, and glibc causes less "troubles". Therefore, this
>  >> patch proposes to use glibc as our default C library when using the
>  >> internal toolchain backend instead of uClibc.
>  >> 
>  >> Of course, we will keep the support for uClibc, which remains an
>  >> important C library choice, for space-constrained systems, or simply
>  >> for architectures that are not supported by glibc.
>  >> 
>  >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
> 
>  > Acked-by: Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
> 
>  > Yes, I will be a bit sad that we demote uClibc-ng, but let's face it:
>  > the word moves on, let's move along.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> Acked-by: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>
> 
The next move is probably increase testing with glibc in the Buildroot testsuite?

Acked-by: Romain Naour <romain.naour@gmail.com>

Best regards,
Romain
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot