Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] Start porting UML to nolibc

[Hajime Tazaki <thehajime@gmail.com>]

Hello Willy,

On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 12:32:17 +0900,
Willy Tarreau wrote:

> > just curious
> > 
> > - are those issues not happening in other libc implementation ? (e.g.,
> >   musl-libc)
> > - same question to nolibc: is there any possibility that nolibc will
> >   evolve as glibc does, and this evolution introduces the UML issues ?
> 
> Nolibc focuses on early boot programs. That does not mean it will never
> evolve towrards more generic usage but this remains unlikely, and in any
> case there's the goal will remain not to degrade the experience on the
> original target (early boot). That doesn't mean there will never be any
> breakage but we're doing our best to keep things in a clean and workable
> state. Regarding threads, it seems unlikely that they'll arrive any time
> soon. But if they did, assuming UML would by then be a long established
> user, we'd certainly find a solution together (even via build-time
> defines if needed).

thanks for the detail background of nolibc.
I understand nolibc will evolve with the carefully considering the
issues we faced with glibc.

> Hoping this answers your question.

definitely, thanks again.

-- Hajime