From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Vicente Olivert Riera <Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 17:00:10 +0100
Subject: [Buildroot] Is uClibc dead?
In-Reply-To: <nh26a3$g4l$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <nh26a3$g4l$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <5734A88A.9090309@imgtec.com>
List-Id: <buildroot.busybox.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: buildroot@busybox.net

+CC Waldemar

On 12/05/16 16:08, Grant Edwards wrote:
> I recently decided to check to see what changes had been made to
> uClibc since the 4 year old version we're using in our product.  So I
> went to https://uclibc.org.
> 
> After jumping through hoops because all the SSL certificates are
> invalid/expired I see under latest news:
> 
>   15 May 2012, uClibc 0.9.33.2 Released
> 
>   uClibc-0.9.33.2 was released today. 
> 
> Odd... no releases for four years?
> 
> Is uClibc abandoned?
> 
> I see that buildroot now uses uclibc-ng which, according Wikipedia, is
> 
>   "a spin-off of uClibc that regularly provides a stable and tested
>    release, which is more suitable for different software development
>    processes."
> 
> So... processes different than what?
>