On 4/24/23 08:33, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 4:19 AM Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>> 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 > > And importantly, as the musl maintainer, I recommended against it. We > should take the opportunity to engage with upstream to fully support > glibc instead. Can they support glibc without either taking on a huge maintenance burden or weakening the sandbox? -- Sincerely, Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers) _______________________________________________ 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
