Re: musl thoughts

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>]

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 03:18:01PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>...
> There are certain design aspects of musl which are actually turning
> out to be good
> e.g. there is no __MUSL__ define, so non-portable code can not be
> hidden which is a good thing,
>...

Please take a closer look at some of the musl changes to NM that made
upgrading NM so hard for Andreas.

+#if defined(__GLIBC__)
 #include <net/ethernet.h>
+#else /* musl libc */
+#define ETH_ALEN       6               /* Octets in one ethernet addr   */
+#endif

Using __GLIBC__ in workarounds for bugs in musl is wrong,
and cannot be upstreamed since it would do the wrong thing
on other non-broken C libraries.

> While the eyes may hurt
> to see them, it does serve a
> good reminder of whats needed for a given package.
>...

Who is responsible for fixing the root causes of such bugs in musl,
so that the workaround patches can be dropped from packages like NM?

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed