On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 4:10 PM Demi Marie Obenour <demiobenour@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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? Whatever the community wants to support will be supported. That's how open source projects work. Previously it seemed like nobody was interested in Firecracker, so nothing happened. If there's interest now, things will change. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ 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
