Re: [RFC] dropping support for ancient versions of curl

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 10:49:47AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

> Let's reiterate that we are talking about some #ifdef's here that are a
> tiny maintenance burden. That may have a bug here and there, easily fixed.

Forget the maintenance cost for a moment. My concern is that we are
doing users a disservice by shipping broken and untested code without
them (or us) realizing it. The compile failure is the _best_ case,
because they know there's a bug to be fixed. A build that quietly fails
to enforce security properties is actively dangerous, and the user would
potentially be better off with an #error.

> Also, maybe, just maybe, there are more pressing issues than removing a
> couple lines here and there? This discussion vaguely reminds me of the
> opening statement of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality...
> Just saying'...

It's not just removing a couple of lines. It's remembering to check and
#ifdef new lines that get added, too (this conversation started because
of review on another patch which failed to do so). Is our attitude "add
it and when somebody with an ancient curl complains and provides a
patch, we'll #ifdef it"?

-Peff



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]