you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 day ago (9 children)

Why are trying to replace the Gnu tools with non-GPL stuff again?

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    musl is far more POSIX compliant, secure, and cleaner code (no dirty hacks) than glibc. Not everything has to be a culture war. Do you use sudo (ISC-style)? Do you use curl (MIT-style, curl license)? Even OpenSSH isn't GPL (BSD). Not everything is a plot; vulnerabilities happen regardless of what license you pick.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago

    Also in addition to that info, I like about musl to be able to compile without relying on glibc, which is a "common" (notice I set it in quotes, don't take it literally) source of dependency problem. Often if there is a glibc dependency problem, then you can't do much about it, because the entire system relies on the correct one. With musl your application doesn't depend on external library.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    musl is far more ..........., secure, .......

    you are funny. i wish i could attend one of your standups 😹

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    Attacker hacks into a system, sees that it's running a GPL libc rather than a MIT libc and then politely excuses themselves because they aren't willing to share their spoils.

    Bad code is bad code, no matter what license it's written in.

  • source
  • parent