Re: [dev] [9base] bionic port

From: sin <>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 11:51:20 +0000

On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:40:27AM +0100, FRIGN wrote:
> Greetings fellow hackers,
> I checked out the project ideas page[1] today and wondered if bionic
> was still a desirable choice for porting 9base or if other libraries
> like musl or dietlibc might be a better choice here, given the fact
> bionic is mainly targeted at ARM (for instance, FORTIFY_SOURCE only
> works on this arch and with GCC only).
> Could it be that bionic has been chosen as the lowest common
> denominator to still be able to use it as one standard library also in
> regard to C++ on

Personally, I'd go with musl. What is your plan at the moment?
Received on Fri Dec 20 2013 - 12:51:20 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 20 2013 - 13:00:08 CET