On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 08:46:39AM -0000, François Rigault wrote: > To echo > > > To trust code, it needs to be reviewed. > > If the code is reviewed, and the build system is sane, [..] > > I deduce from your response that the binary tests committed in > systemd were not reviewed neither by co-maintainers nor by > downstream package maintainers. Yes, some of those blobs are treated as opaque. > I understand that the build system used by systemd makes it much > less probable that some binary blob used in a test obfuscates > something that could be used for other purposes outside the test; > still, wouldn't you agree it would be a good practice to make sure > everyone is able to review everything in the source code repository? It's a trade-off. We can include a useful test case (e.g. a journal file that causes journalctl to busyloop or crash), to verify that the issue was fixed and that we don't regress, or we can reject the file and forego the test. With a reasonable build system, it's fairly easy to figure out how the file is used, and I think it's entirely reasonable to review _that_. OTOH, figuring out what effect that file would have if (hypothetically) used as input to a different tool or whether it might embed some code which might be extracted somehow is hard. But I really think that the risk is low. Also, consider that systemd has 2500 .c and .h files with 875k lines… It's not like you can review that in a weekend. Zbyszek -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
