public inbox for libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Remove add-ons mechanism
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 22:38:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709282236001.25896@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKCAbMjrESb7_3=9ueuMKWeHwBJ9q_8_TdtojPejNPCr3JEUrw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Zack Weinberg wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> >
> > Add-ons involve significant, little-used complexity in the glibc build
> > system, and make it hard to understand what the space of possible
> > glibc configurations is.  This patch removes the add-ons mechanism.
> 
> I don't disagree with this patch exactly, but I was thinking of using
> the add-ons mechanism to prototype a CSPRNG addition to glibc and I'd
> like to ask how you think that should be done instead (and more
> generally, how you think new features that people might want to
> experiment with but that are not yet ready for prime time should be
> distributed -- branches are Not Great, as one has to keep rebasing
> them)

I'd expect branches to be used.  That way the feature is in a form 
actually more or less like how it might be added to glibc (including e.g. 
adding interfaces to existing headers if appropriate).  I don't think 
frequent rebasing is really needed.

If you also want the feature to be usable by people with older glibc 
versions without needing to update / rebuild glibc, that would indicate 
having a separate library version of the feature, with some form of 
automation to copy sources from one to the other.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

  reply	other threads:[~2017-09-28 22:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-09-28 17:49 Joseph Myers
2017-09-28 22:01 ` Zack Weinberg
2017-09-28 22:38   ` Joseph Myers [this message]
2017-09-29 11:04   ` Florian Weimer
2017-09-30  6:35 ` Florian Weimer
2017-09-30 21:42   ` Joseph Myers
2017-10-05 10:39 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2017-10-05 11:07   ` Florian Weimer
2017-10-05 12:54     ` Joseph Myers
2017-10-05 13:16       ` libcidn (was: Re: Remove add-ons mechanism) Andreas K. Huettel
2017-10-05 13:39         ` libcidn Andreas Schwab
2017-10-05 13:40         ` libcidn Florian Weimer
2017-10-05 21:11       ` Remove add-ons mechanism Andreas K. Huettel
2017-10-05 21:30         ` Joseph Myers
2017-10-05 15:59 ` Joseph Myers

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.20.1709282236001.25896@digraph.polyomino.org.uk \
    --to=joseph@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=zackw@panix.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).