Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl> writes:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:42:16AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>> I'm with Linus on this: let's just revert to the old behaviour. A
>> tiny amount of clock cycles saved isn't worth the instability.
>
> I'd instead propose to sacrifice a tiny amount of cycles to check for
> overlapping and abort()ing so buggy code can be fixed. Random instability
> is the worst kind of error, a clean crash is easy to fix. Heck, we can even
> make a change just before wheezy is frozen to make it call memmove() when a
> breakage is detected. Just please don't paper over the bugs until then.
+1.
Maybe do this in 2 steps: 1) give a warning on stderr, 2) abort.
If even gcc fails (see other mail in this thread) then aborting when we
don't need to doesn't seem like a good option.
Or have a env var to disable the abort() so one can work around it.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ei4ebuc8.fsf@frosties.localnet
