Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:47:42 +0100 From: John Spencer <maillist-musl@...fooze.de> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: NULL On 01/09/2013 02:09 PM, croco@...nwall.com wrote: > Hi folks, > > On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 12:02:29PM +0100, John Spencer wrote: > >> so for me, there are 3 options how to deal with issue in the future: >> 2) change musl so it is compatible with those apps. this would mean: > >> this change is the easiest solution: any problem will be magically fixed. > [...] > However, sometimes the practice forces us to do wrong things just because > we have no time or resources to do what is the right, and it looks like > this is exactly the case. So perhaps the "option 2" will finally be > choosen, despite we don't like it. However, I'd suggest at least to let > the people know this is a WORKAROUND for the bugs THEY introduce: make this > hack disabled by default, enabled by a compile-time option, and issue a > warning which points them to this discussion or something similar. as of now, musl only supports a single configuration. having 2 different versions of musl in the wild, one that works with their apps and another one that does not, is definitely not desirable > Something like "Okay, if your program doesn't work without this workaround, > then you can use the workaround, but you'd better fix your program". This > will not do much influence while musl is not so popular, but I hope it will > become popular one day (I really do... let's give the damn world a chance), > and then the people will have something to think about. here we have the typical chicken-and-egg problem: as long as applications compiled with musl just crash, while they work perfectly well with glibc, i think most contributors will become discouraged soon and continue using what they're familiar with.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.