linux-kernel - Re: The who needs reviews anyways [PATCH]

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Thu, 8 Feb 2007 23:53:09 +0100 (CET)
From:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Oleg Verych <olecom@...wer.upol.cz>
Subject: Re: The who needs reviews anyways [PATCH]

Hi,

On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Historically, people used to do:
>  - /bin/sh was the "standard shell" (bash)
>  - /bin/[t]csh is what clueless weenies use for interactive work.
> 
> (Yeah, I'm not a [t]csh fan ;)
> 
> And you did break that.
> 
> It's quite possible that all modern distributions will install /bin/bash 
> as a link to /bin/sh, but I don't see the point of that particular change. 
> We aren't even all that bash-centric any more. If you have a 
> POSIX-compatible shell in /bin/sh, it really _should_ work. It just can't 
> be something really broken.

I don't quite understand, the Makefile doesn't care anymore about /bin/sh 
with this patch, the Makefile checks only for $BASH and /bin/bash 
(equivalent to adding "#! /bin/bash" to scripts) and if the latter fails 
it's possible some of our scripts will fail. We could make sure that all 
our scripts are POSIX clean, but is it really worth the effort? It would 
make casual kbuild hacking only even more difficult, as one has to check 
it works with the various shells.

> > - proper quoting
> > - proper indentation
> 
> One thing I'm wondering about is whether we could have a "does this warn" 
> test. I guess you can do it with -Werror, but it might be nice to have 
> some tests for "does the -Wxyzzy flag warn also for proper code"

Adding something like try-compile should be possible, but we should be 
careful with this, the more checks we add the more work is done at every 
make invocation.

bye, Roman
-
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/