It's more efficient, it's got better licensing, and it's standards-compliant. But the only Steam version available for Linux is built on glibc. What's stopping them from supporting musl?
>>103250238glibc abi is actually stable, please form your own opinions instead of parroting other's
>>103250238What would be the best distro for compiling binaries with musl for the use of other people, Gentoo?
musl is way slower (global allocator lock), so no. Large vendors will never embrace it.
>>103250238It's time to admit that the C library is not an aceptable library. Take a look at the memory allocation functions for example.
>>103250238gnu is simply better
>>103250238I love musl, I fucking despise (((dynamic))) linking>>103251101Alpine
>>103251101Setup an alpine docker image with all the build tools you need, and use that to compile your project.
>>103253331docker is for faggots
>>103253384Filtered
>>103251203not just alloc, but the math functions as well.
>>103250238Android's Bionic libc was based around an early version of musl.
>>103254148bionic libc is now an amalgamation of the worst parts of OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD libcs
>>103253546people only use docker because they were filtered by lxc
I fell for the alpine meme and encountered issues. The busybox tools have slightly different syntax and there were a couple of compatibility issues. Overall it was OK. I wished I could use hyprdots on hyprland but they are so heavily coded for pacman and systemd it was impossible.
I hope not. I like not being affected by vulnerabilities.
musl slow, glibc fast. I'm more wondering if bionic is any good than anything else.
Only thing I wish is it was easier to target a specific glibc version without having to build a whole toolchain around a specific glibc version. I'm tired of having to basically juggle container images like rootless chroots to do something a compiler should have been doing by now in the year of our lord 2024.
linking is slow
>>103256755Doesn't NixOS fix this?
>>103256755This fr ong
