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]
Message-ID: <20210502203253.GH10366@gate.crashing.org>
Date:   Sun, 2 May 2021 15:32:53 -0500
From:   Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Raise the minimum GCC version to 5.2

On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 01:00:28PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-05-02 at 13:30 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Sat, May 01, 2021 at 07:41:53PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > Why not raise the minimum gcc compiler version even higher?
> 
> On Sun, 2021-05-02 at 13:37 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Everyone should always use an as new release as practical
> 
> []
> 
> > The latest GCC 5 release is only three and a half years old.
> 
> You argue slightly against yourself here.

I don't?

> Yes, it's mostly a question of practicality vs latest.
> 
> clang requires a _very_ recent version.
> gcc _could_ require a later version.
> Perhaps 8 might be best as that has a __diag warning control mechanism.

I have no idea what you mean?

> gcc 8.1 is now 3 years old today.

And there will be a new GCC 8 release very soon now!

The point is, you inconvenience users if you require a compiler version
they do not already have.  Five years might be fine, but three years is
not.


Segher

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ