Path: csiph.com!au2pb.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED!nerds-end From: "John R. Levine" Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Advice on C libraries Date: 7 Oct 2015 22:13:17 -0400 Organization: Compilers Central Lines: 19 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <15-10-005@comp.compilers> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: miucha.iecc.com 1444270496 63186 2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970 (8 Oct 2015 02:14:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 02:14:56 +0000 (UTC) Keywords: question, C, library Posted-Date: 07 Oct 2015 22:14:56 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com X-Received-Bytes: 1598 X-Received-Body-CRC: 477118940 Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:1632 I'm working with some people who are building a C language toolchain for a new 64 bit architecture. A large part of the work is getting the usual libraries to work. The obvious choice would be glibc, except that the C compiler is not gcc, and getting glibc to work with anything else is not for the faint of heart or short of time. We're looking at musl which seems quite promising, small, looks well coded, MIT license. Anyone have experience with it or advice to offer? Here's a not necessarily unbiased comparison of four open source C libraries: http://www.etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html R's, John