This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Machine maintainer veto.

On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 00:03 +0200, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 13:09 -0500, Steven Munroe wrote:
> > It takes at least two to be constructive.
> Agreed.
> > Some like argue perfection or
> > require convincing everyone (not just GLIBC community members) to change
> > what they are already doing to a more "correct" way.
> I don't understand this sentence.
Sorry lost in translation ... Said more plainly.

Have you looked at what is going on PHP, OpenSSL, Boost, FFmpeg. ... and
the thousands of other packages that make up a complete distro?

I suspect you will not be happy with what you find.

So if you think __builtin_cpu_supports() is a bad solution and they
should be using STD_GNU_IFUNC then you need to convince them.

And __builtin_cpu_supports exist and has existed for Intel in compilers
including GCC for a while. So you have to convince them.

Arguing with me, will not help you achieve your goal.

Just being pragmatic ...

> > Like saying users
> > are stupid and they doing it wrong is not constructive. 
> Agreed on the "are stupid", but saying that they are doing something
> that is not something glibc wants to support is not something that's
> necessarily bad.
But they you should be talking to them, explaining to them, convincing

Holding a platform maintainer hostage does not help you.

> > Straw-man, slipper slope, moral hazards argument should be excluded,
> > because there there no rational response to a an irrational argument. 
> > 
> > If we don't restrain this behavior, we allow individuals to block
> > platform specific patches indefinitely.
> That goes both ways.  You can apply the same concerns to the other way
> around.  We need to find rules that are acceptable for all sides.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]