previously on this list Thomas Goirand contributed: > > OpenBSD developers are extensively cleaning up OpenSSL 1.0.1g > > I'm not so sure if "cleaning-up" really means removing 90k lines of code > without extensive checks. I'd very much prefer some unit tests added to > the current code base, or a *long* audit process for example.
I understand the concern over reliability in the short term but they are not playing and quite frankly in light of heartbleed any issues that align with 99% of use cases can be fixed and I don't think that has anything to do with the OPs thread. If it does what 99% need (you should test in any case) and has 90k less lines of code then the rest can be better audited and if better understood then it is more likely to work especially in the long term, it is not part of OpenBSD stable yet. I guess you haven't witnessed all the examples of code rot and worse that they have found? -- _______________________________________________________________________ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) In Other Words - Don't design like polkit or systemd _______________________________________________________________________ I have no idea why RTFM is used so aggressively on LINUX mailing lists because whilst 'apropos' is traditionally the most powerful command on Unix-like systems it's 'modern' replacement 'apropos' on Linux is a tool to help psychopaths learn to control their anger. (Kevin Chadwick) _______________________________________________________________________ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/930532.18175...@smtp112.mail.ir2.yahoo.com
