On 01/08/2011 11:10 AM, Jon Masters wrote: > On Sat, 2011-01-08 at 10:30 +0000, Andy Green wrote: >> On 01/08/11 09:54, Somebody in the thread at some point said: >>> On 01/08/2011 02:49 AM, Chris Tyler wrote: > >>> I would like to offer a counter-proposal - no package is accepted into >>> Fedora (ARM?) until it stops generating misalignment warnings. That way >> >> I think your proposal is a bad idea. > > FWIW I think you're talking at cross-purposes. There's no reason there > can't be a policy favoring stuff that doesn't generate miss-alignment > warnings (whether outright denial, or just some kind of part of package > reviews, and no reason this isn't a generic Fedora problem rather than > being ARM specific), have software like abrt pick it up, and still do a > fixup+warn setting in the kernel. You won't get silent breakage, and > you'll send a message that software needs to be fixed. Yup, exactly what Jon said. Such things need to be reported as bugs. Running with fixup should be something used only on development/test systems. It shouldn't be the norm for a live deployed system (and thus, implicitly, shouldn't be the norm for a stable distribution release). It must stop being acceptble for code to rely on this for correct functioning. Gordan _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
