| 1 |
On 8/17/21 2:24 PM, Aaron Bauman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 01:27:45PM -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:40 AM Anthony G. Basile <blueness@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> |
| 5 |
>>> Hi everyone, |
| 6 |
>>> |
| 7 |
>>> Can I get feedback on the following news item? (BTW, thanks soap) |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>> Title: uClibc-ng retirement on 2023/01/01 |
| 10 |
>>> Author: Anthony G. Basile <blueness@g.o> |
| 11 |
>>> Posted: 2021-08-15 |
| 12 |
>>> Revision: 1 |
| 13 |
>>> News-Item-Format: 2.0 |
| 14 |
>>> Display-If-Profile: default/linux/uclibc/* |
| 15 |
>>> |
| 16 |
>>> uClibc-ng is mostly abandoned upstream, and since my RFC in Jan 2021, |
| 17 |
>>> noone has volunteered to step up maintenance or expressed interest in |
| 18 |
>>> the uClibc-ng profiles. With this announcement we last-rite the "uclibc" |
| 19 |
>>> profiles, which will be removed on 2023/01/01. For parties interested in |
| 20 |
>>> an alternative libc, consider moving to musl, which is supported. |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> 2023? That seems like a pretty long time to wait to remove something |
| 23 |
>> that isn't very well supported right now. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> +1 |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> While I have no involvement with uClibc-ng, it does seem awfully long |
| 28 |
> before removal. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> -Aaron |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
How does 2022-08-01 sound? That's about 1 year. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
| 37 |
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
| 38 |
E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
| 39 |
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA |
| 40 |
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA |
Archives