supermin
libc
supermin | libc | |
---|---|---|
2 | 2 | |
161 | 479 | |
1.2% | 1.0% | |
6.0 | 7.3 | |
4 months ago | 3 months ago | |
OCaml | C | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 only | MIT License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
supermin
-
Nolibc: A minimal C-library replacement shipped with the kernel
He briefly mentions dietlibc ("not evolving anymore") and ulibc. I think he'd be better off contributing to those projects.
FWIW I have built a program that needs a tiny initramfs[1] and we've found that dietlibc and musl worked really well in producing very tiny programs. Using glibc is terrible however - it links huge amounts of code into even the smallest program.
[1] https://github.com/libguestfs/supermin/blob/86fd6f3e86ab99d5...
-
RootFS Tooling
Supermin - libguestfs
libc
-
Nolibc: A minimal C-library replacement shipped with the kernel
Seems unlikely. My spot check of the the two vfprintf implementations shows no flow from one to the other, and shows that part of the Cosmopolitan code has an older lineage than nolibc.
The nolibc source has many reference to copyright held by "Willy Tarreau", under LGPL-2.1 OR MIT license, with a copyright date starting in 2017.
The string "Tarreau" does not exist in the Cosmopolitan library, so that's a strong negative there. Let's look closer.
The file organization is quite different. And so is the implementation. So that's another negative.
Compare the vfprintf in nolibc at https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc4/source/tools/inclu... (a 'minimal vfprintf()') with the one in cosmopolitan starting at https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan/blob/master/libc/stdio/....
Right away we can see nolibc places many functions in the same file while Cosmopolitan uses a one-function-per-filename organization.
Cosmopolitan's fvprintf locks the file (which nolibc doesn't need to do) then calls vfprintf_unlocked which calls __fmt at https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan/blob/master/libc/fmt/fm... , which is the actual implementation. It look very different from NOLIBC's.
Okay, so perhaps that's they way now but not at the beginning?
We can also go back to Cosmopolitan's original implementation and see how vfprintf goes through https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan/blob/c91b3c50068224929c... to call "palandprintf", which https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan/blob/c91b3c50068224929c... says is copyright "Marco Paland" from 2014-2019.
That's a few years older than the start of nolibc, available from https://github.com/mpaland/printf , and part of https://github.com/embeddedartistry/libc , a "libc targeted for embedded systems usage".
Thus, multiple factors seem to agree that nolibc code is not used in the Cosmopolitan library.
- Any ultra portable libc?
What are some alternatives?
infra-devops - Infra and DevOps Utils, like Kickstart to RootFS file builder in docker/podman environment, using AlmaLinux as foundation. This utility can be used in CI/CD pipeline to build docker RootFS files
cosmopolitan - build-once run-anywhere c library
rootfs - Linux root file system builder in the spirit of buildroot
libspng - Simple, modern libpng alternative
sig-cloud-instance-images
zrythm - a highly automated and intuitive digital audio workstation - official mirror
linuxkit - A toolkit for building secure, portable and lean operating systems for containers
z88dk - The development kit for over a hundred z80 family machines - c compiler, assembler, linker, libraries.
printf - Tiny, fast, non-dependent and fully loaded printf implementation for embedded systems. Extensive test suite passing.
kickstarts
hexchat - GTK+ IRC client