Re: [dev] Re: obase - moving forward?

From: Jens Staal <>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 09:49:02 +0200

2012/6/5 Christian Neukirchen <>:
> Jens Staal <> writes:
>> At the moment I have some issues with that the binaries refuse to be
>> 100% static
> The "musl" branch now properly builds static by default.
> Use  bmake CC=musl-gcc  when building the musl branch.
> --
> Christian Neukirchen  <>

Awesome! thanks
The AUR ( is an
attempt to package the musl branch

- seems to be completely static

costs(compared to main branch):
- binaries do not execute (!) - the Arch GCC bug for musl recently discussed?
- 0.14 MiB bigger

-not built in bin:
< cksum dd sum cp domainname rm sha1 chgrp cpio ls pax sha256 tar
chmod date md5

-not built in sbin:
< chown

-not built in usr/bin:
< Mail awk b64decode b64encode chflags ci cmp co dc du flex flex++
getent gzsig help ident lex m4 mail mailx make man mandoc merge rcs
rcsclean rcsdiff rcsmerge rlog rpcgen rpcinfo script sed sort split
strings touch ul uudecode uuencode vacation

-not built in usr/sbin:
< chgrp_AT_ chown@

... so compared to the previous glibc (main) branch there are some
serious costs at the moment...
Hopefully the missing functionality can be fixed.
(I will also try to get heirloom static against musl)

Ps. sorry if this starts to be off topic for the suckless dev list Ds.
Received on Wed Jun 06 2012 - 09:49:02 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Jun 06 2012 - 10:00:15 CEST