Re: Firecracker microVM manager

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> > There is no problem technically; the Copr repo[2] is building
> > Firecracker RPMs with musl.  Maintainers of both Rust and musl seemed
> > to be against it in Fedora.  From this thread:
> Why does Fedora not want to ship Firecracker statically linked to musl?
> That is the supported and tested configuration upstream.  Using glibc
> or dynamic linking is not supported for production use.

Because glibc is Fedora's supported libc implementation and supporting
two different implementations at the same time is complex
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux