Hacker News Reader

Comment by blueflow | Hacker News Reader

alternate libc's like musl. the eglibc controversy showed this was necessary but poettering initially refused to support a "non-useful libc". his words.

View on HN

But musl exists today? And even I use it from time to time, mostly I think in Alpine Linux. How was musl hindered if we can use it?

Maybe it isn't as popular as you would have wanted, but I don't think that's the same as claiming it's been hindered by systemd.

> But musl exists today

Yes and the systemd crowd wants to embrace and extinguish it as well [1]

[1] https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/v259-rc1/NEWS

I got to line 1500 before I gave up, what from that indicates they want to "extinguish" musl?

1. Support musl 2. Become mainstream with musl distros 3. Become dependency in practical terms 4. Then even software optimized for musl-based distros has to deal and support systemd

But do you have any proof for beyond #1? Seems like a far jump here, but maybe I'm missing something obvious.

Nope. It's my view of the situation and I'm confident that will be the case. Not that it's an evil plan. Just a nature taking its course. This is how I see it.

So if systemd refuses to support musl, it's "hindering the spread and innovation in the Linux space", and when they change their mind and work to add support for musl, it's "to embrace and extinguish it".

Paradoxically that's how I see it.

Being an old fart and sysvinit pundit I am course wrong.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com