Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

uClibc Is Still Around As A Lightweight C Standard Library

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • uClibc Is Still Around As A Lightweight C Standard Library

    Phoronix: uClibc Is Still Around As A Lightweight C Standard Library

    The uClibc project is still advancing as a lightweight, performant C standard library even while glibc has been making performance advancements and other improvements as well...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...px=uClibc-2017

  • #2
    Typo:

    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    and add new architecture supporrt.

    Comment


    • #3
      So what are the downsides? Worse performance? No optional features?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by arakan94 View Post
        So what are the downsides? Worse performance? No optional features?
        https://uclibc.org/downloads/Glibc_v...ifferences.txt

        Comment


        • #5
          Tried searching for it without any results, but can uClibC, uClibC-ng and musl be used to compile a vanilla linux kernel from kernel.org as-is, without any patches?

          Comment


          • #6
            Really I know this might be tough but I am getting to the point why claim all this support I want to see quality control backing up claims.

            uClibc-ng claims Supported architectures of 28. When was the last time those past test-suite and when it the next time it going to have test suite run.

            I know 9 of glibc claim works because debian uses and officially supports it. Of course that leaves another 9 out of the 18 really not tested that often as far as I can tell.

            Musl I know of few distributions that mean about 4 out of it 12 claimed are tested regularly the other 8 is who knows when they were tested.

            If something is not tested regularly you can bet when you go to use it you will be the unlucky one to find that is broken. Really we need it to be simple way to find out when stuff was lasted tested and how regularly.

            There is a big gap in market for a lightweight well tested c library that developers can trust. To be correct there is a big gap in the market for a well tested c library on all the platforms it claims to support so developers know it will work without having to waste the next x amount of hours attempting to fix it.

            Also the means to disable functionality out of c libraries at build have limited application since the introduction link time optimisation to compilers as static binaries will automatically get smaller as long as the c libraries internals fairly sane for the compiler to process(not glibc) More often than not if you needing something using dynamic binaries you will be wanting the most of c you can. More and more embedded these days is multi core so dropping threading has come less of an advantage.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
              Tried searching for it without any results, but can uClibC, uClibC-ng and musl be used to compile a vanilla linux kernel from kernel.org as-is, without any patches?
              kernel is a self-contained project, while it may peruse some libc functions, it generates an independent binary. You should be able to build kernel on any system, as long as the compiler is good enough.


              Personally, i think uclibc has sort of backed itself into a corner with extremely scarce release schedule, and i am not sure if uclibc-ng will help. Musl seems to be taking up support in its stead.

              Comment


              • #8
                Uclibc is getting more common in Docker images at such a pace it's not funny anymore. It might well turn out the most common libc in servers

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by oiaohm View Post
                  Musl I know of few distributions that mean about 4 out of it 12 claimed are tested regularly the other 8 is who knows when they were tested.
                  Musl is default in OpenWRT/LEDE and is kept up-to-date, they routinely build x86, ARM (various), mips/mipsel (various), PPC (various), they do find bugs and report/fix them upstream for their architectures.

                  This leaves out experimental archs, more or less.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by yoshi314 View Post

                    kernel is a self-contained project, while it may peruse some libc functions, it generates an independent binary. You should be able to build kernel on any system, as long as the compiler is good enough.
                    To clarify a little: the kernel does not use any libc at all but implements a few libc-like functions for internel use.
                    Also, "compiler being good enough" basically means "not too ancient gcc", as thats the only one which will successfully build a linux kernel.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X