[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFNaaxSMNEccFOh+3MJegsJ1iSXhJrLHTg59SbX5r=Z5TLxRpw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:08:34 -0500
From: Bobby Bingham <uhmmmm@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Re: Best bikeshed ever (feature test macros)
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> wrote:
>
> 3. Make as much software as possible "just work".
>
I would much rather that the software worked because it was correct,
and not because musl worked around its brokenness.
I realize this isn't a very practical viewpoint, especially if you
hope to have musl see any adoption, but you asked for opinions and I
think broken software should be allowed to break. The fixes belong in
those projects, not worked around in musl. This is wishful thinking,
but perhaps if we had a major libc that exposed this brokenness by
default, it would raise awareness among the authors of other software
and they would fix it.
With glibc providing the kitchen sink, they have very little incentive
to do anything about it, if they're even aware of it in the first
place.
I vote for #1.
--
Bobby Bingham
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.
