🔜fosdem
@lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
@m0xee @p @jessica I couldn't care less, only time I used it was at previous dayjob and it was dropping my messages so I told people to use email instead.
@lanodan @jessica @m0xee
> You're too used to Plan9
Everyone else is too used to drinking the fluoride.
> Go stuff loves linking to the lib C on Unixes
cgo is haram. (This is why I abandoned IPFS's libp2p.)
> Mostly because of broken things like nsswitch.conf
I can't think of a good reason to rely on NSS for anything rather than avoiding it like with all ancient broken cruft.
> You're too used to Plan9
Everyone else is too used to drinking the fluoride.
> Go stuff loves linking to the lib C on Unixes
cgo is haram. (This is why I abandoned IPFS's libp2p.)
> Mostly because of broken things like nsswitch.conf
I can't think of a good reason to rely on NSS for anything rather than avoiding it like with all ancient broken cruft.
@p @jessica@mk.absturztau.be @lanodan It does. There is no reference toolchain for 32-bit PPC and there are some issues building gcc-go. I don't remember all the details now, but there are some header issues. Like some register structs are real structs in glibc, but macros in musl something like that.
No, I'm pretty sure it can be done, but requires more looking into. This is definitely far from being the "easy" solution so I just said that it's not there 😅
@m0xee @jessica @lanodan
> There is no reference toolchain for 32-bit PPC
Unsupported architectures would certainly would matter, yes. MUSL doesn't matter if you're shipping a static binary around, though. I've been building Linux-ARM binaries from Plan 9, and as long as there's no cgo (JIHAD) it doesn't matter.
> some header issues
Surely you can build a statically linked binary and send that to the MUSL system. I've never used gcc-go (I use their C compiler only reluctantly) but I'm sure that they will let you -static anything their compiler produces.
> There is no reference toolchain for 32-bit PPC
Unsupported architectures would certainly would matter, yes. MUSL doesn't matter if you're shipping a static binary around, though. I've been building Linux-ARM binaries from Plan 9, and as long as there's no cgo (JIHAD) it doesn't matter.
> some header issues
Surely you can build a statically linked binary and send that to the MUSL system. I've never used gcc-go (I use their C compiler only reluctantly) but I'm sure that they will let you -static anything their compiler produces.
