> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2025 07:39:55 +0700 > From: Robert Elz <k...@munnari.oz.au> > > Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2025 06:50:47 +0700 > From: Robert Elz <k...@munnari.oz.au> > Message-ID: <13328.1740959...@jacaranda.noi.kre.to> > > | This is the wrong solution, > > Further, given that it doesn't even build, please revert it. > > I will implement a sane solution in the next day or two (I'll > even test build (etc) it before committing ...)
I did test build, and I ran the arc4random tests, including the test I added to verify the new more-graceful failure mode. I just forgot to add one file in the commit. With that file added the tree is fine again. > Please everyone, avoid implementing hasty solutions, just because we > seem to need a solution to something today - we don't - a few days more > consideration and discussion can make solutions much more sane, and less > likely to cause problems. I think it is a trifle excessive to characterize a never-fails variant of pthread_atfork with caller-allocated storage as insane. But since this change is evidently controversial, which I hadn't anticipated when I committed it, I'll revert it for now.
