Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 15:10:55 +0800
From: Ruinland ChuanTzu Tsai <ruinland@andestech.com>
To: <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>
CC: <justin@specialbusservice.com>, <alankao@andestech.com>, <sir@cmpwn.com>
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] Alpine Linux on RISC-V
Message-ID: <20191209071053.GA29466@APC301.andestech.com>
Reply-To: <CAK4o1WztgGfyNLd-v1V5ikW7H3yY4SarkuyGpTrybQ-vt8Fqog@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)

I apologize for bombarding previously CC'ed people.
Since I salvaged the mailto address from a downloaded mbox file,
I didn't notice that it's not a valid address.

Hi Alpine folks,

Sorry for bumping up this stale thread. Yet I think it's better to start
from an existing discussion.

I'm an employee of Andes Technology Corporation, a Taiwan-based CPU IP
company. Currently, we (AndesTech) have Linux running on our RISC-V 32
platform with hand-crafted musl-based rootfs.

For now, we're running musl's libc-test with Drew's RV32 musl port,
and most of things works perfectly. Some minor issues have been patched
and reported to musl's upstream[1].

Just like everyone who uses Alpine Linux, we're in favor of light-
weighted, secured and highly customizable Linux distribution. Hence, we
have strong intrests in supporting Alpine Linux on RV32 platforms and  
we are willing to maintain the support in the future.

- - - -

BTW, I'm wondering what is the attitude that Alpine holds toward musl's
new memory allocator draft ?

[1] : https://github.com/riscv/riscv-musl/issues/10

Best regards,
Ruinland Chuan-Tzu Tsai