https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1253244 --- Comment #5 from Nikola Forró <nforro@xxxxxxxxxx> --- As far as I know, uClibc package in Fedora exists only to enable static linking with busybox. Nothing else depends on it, and it's practical use is limited because it only contains static library and headers. From this point of view, I think replacing it with uClibc-ng is acceptable. Both libraries are very similar/compatible and busybox builds fine with uClibc-ng. On the other hand, should there be more use cases than just building busybox, why don't let both libraries co-exist? (In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #3) > 1. I don't see the reason that uclibc-ng should obsolete uclibc, at least. > not "more suitable for different software development processes.", POC? > > Fedora switches uclibc-ng may cause troubles to downstream folks or just > users, have you measured the actual impact? As far as I can see from > upstream, "This might change in the future". This is concerning only config file, so nothing that users should get in touch with. > If uclibc FTBFS, or no active upstream activities, then it's time to do the > retire, but not now *I think*. Especially from upstream git I still can see > commits in the past 3 years after its latest release. You are right, but there has been no uClibc release for 3 years, while uClibc-ng is released regularly. Also, uClibc-ng claims to implement changes happening in uClibc. > 2. I'm not sure if uclibc in Fedora is a package or just another c lib, if > just a package ,you still need to build it with %optflags > (UCLIBC_EXTRA_CFLAGS) Including %{optflags} would break busybox's goal to build smallest binary possible, I think. After all, that's the reason why busybox links with uClibc rather than glibc. > 3. About these 2, should they be enabled? > > Wide Character Support (UCLIBC_HAS_WCHAR) [N/y/?] n > Locale Support (UCLIBC_HAS_LOCALE) [N/y/?] n Again, I'm not sure how this would affect busybox. I should consult it's maintainer. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review