linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] git-am: error out when seeing -b/--binary

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: <20120313175158.GA6653@burratino>
Date:	Tue, 13 Mar 2012 12:51:58 -0500
From:	Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@...il.com>
To:	Junio C Hamano <gitster@...ox.com>
Cc:	Thomas Rast <trast@...dent.ethz.ch>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	git@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-am: error out when seeing -b/--binary

Junio C Hamano wrote:

> I really don't think it is a good idea to avoid mentioning 1.6.0, at
> which we *removed* description of the option in our manual pages and
> from the "git am -h" help message. How much more active deprecation
> would a user want?

A warning when the option is used or a mention in the release notes.

> To put it another way, think what your answer would be when somebody
> sees the message and says "eh? all of a sudden it was removed?".
> Wouldn't you tell him "At 1.6.0 we deprecated it and stopped
> advertising it"?  Why not give that answer upfront?

I would tell her "Since 1.4.3 it has been a compatibility no-op and
our documentation made that clear, and by now based on a search nobody
seems to be using it".

What happened in 1.6.0, then?  Well, before 1.6.0, the git-am(1)
manual said

 -b, --binary
	Pass --allow-binary-replacement flag to git-apply (see
	git-apply(1)).

and the git-apply(1) manual said

 --allow-binary-replacement, --binary
	Historically we did not allow binary patch applied
	without an explicit permission from the user, and this
	flag was the way to do so.  Currently we always allow binary
	patch application, so this is a no-op.

Afterwards, the entry in the git-am(1) manual was removed, saving the
reader a little time.

Jonathan
--
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/