Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (648 mails)

[Philipp Thomas <Philipp.Thomas2@xxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 15:16:15 +0100, Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>  I'm aware of this bug. If the memcpy() backwards copy performance
> gain was significant,

Where do you draw the line? Some programmers also relied on
undocumented behaviour or internal variables and cried murder when
that changed. I remember times where some programmers assumed they
could write to string constants.Or take the case of rpm segfaulting
because it was linked statically but used one of the name resolution
functions, i.e. those supplied by the libnss* libraries. Had that
segfaulting binary been flashplayer or acrobat would you have changed
glibc (which would only been possible by completely ripping out the
nss stuff) or told the issuer to fix his application?

Do you really believe the situation would have been different had the
glibc folks warned the software world in advance that this would be
coming?

I've seen enough stupid programming bugs in open source applications
to believe that binary only software isn't better but even worse.

The question remains, where do we draw the line of acceptable wrong
coding?

Philipp
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx