On 01/08/2011 11:10 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
On Sat, 2011-01-08 at 10:30 +0000, Andy Green wrote:
> On 01/08/11 09:54, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>> On 01/08/2011 02:49 AM, Chris Tyler wrote:
>> I would like to offer a counter-proposal - no package is accepted into
>> Fedora (ARM?) until it stops generating misalignment warnings. That way
>
> I think your proposal is a bad idea.
FWIW I think you're talking at cross-purposes. There's no reason there
can't be a policy favoring stuff that doesn't generate miss-alignment
warnings (whether outright denial, or just some kind of part of package
reviews, and no reason this isn't a generic Fedora problem rather than
being ARM specific), have software like abrt pick it up, and still do a
fixup+warn setting in the kernel. You won't get silent breakage, and
you'll send a message that software needs to be fixed.
Yup, exactly what Jon said. Such things need to be reported as bugs.
Running with fixup should be something used only on development/test
systems. It shouldn't be the norm for a live deployed system (and thus,
implicitly, shouldn't be the norm for a stable distribution release). It
must stop being acceptble for code to rely on this for correct functioning.
Gordan