linux-kernel - Re: "obsolete" versus "deprecated", and a new config option?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <45AE6759.70108@tmr.com>
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:13:45 -0500
From:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
To:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>,
	Linux Kernel mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: "obsolete" versus "deprecated", and a new config option?

Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>   a couple random thoughts on the notion of obsolescence and
> deprecation.

	[...horrible example deleted...]

>   so is that ioctl obsolete or deprecated?  those aren't the same
> things, a good distinction being drawn here by someone discussing
> devfs:
> 
> http://kerneltrap.org/node/1893
> 
> "Devfs is deprecated.  This means it's still available but you should
> consider moving to other options when available.  Obsolete means it
> shouldn't be used.  Some 2.6 docs have confused these two terms WRT
> devfs."
> 
>   yes, and that confusion continues to this day, when a single feature
> is described as both deprecated and obsolete.  not good.  (also, i'm
> guessing that anything that's "obsolete" might deserve a default of
> "n" rather than "y", but that's just me.  :-)

Agree on that. I would hope "obsolete" means there's a newer way which 
should provide the functionality (** help should say where that is **) 
while depreciated should mean "we decided this was a bad solution" or 
something like that.
> 
>   in any event, what about introducing a new config variable,
> OBSOLETE, under "Code maturity level options"?  this would seem to be
> a quick and dirty way to prune anything that is *supposed* to be
> obsolete from the build, to make sure you're not picking up dead code
> by accident.

If you're doing that, why not four variables, for incomplete, 
experimental, obsolete and depreciated? Unfortunately doing any more 
detailed nomenclature would be a LOT of work!
> 
>   i think it would be useful to be able to make that kind of
> distinction since, as the devfs writer pointed out above, the point of
> labelling something "obsolete" is not to *discourage* someone from
> using a feature, it's to imply that they *shouldn't* be using that
> feature.  period.  which suggests there should be an easy, one-step
> way to enforce that absolutely in a build.
> 
>   thoughts?
> 
I think it's a good idea, but doing it right may be more work than the 
benefit justifies.


-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@....com>
   CTO TMR Associates, Inc
   Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/