From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: andrej@kacian.sk Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 9c12f1f7 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 09:22:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vie01a-dmta-pe04-3.mx.upcmail.net (vie01a-dmta-pe04-3.mx.upcmail.net [62.179.121.165]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 9d1e0575 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 09:22:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.31.216.44] (helo=vie01a-pemc-psmtp-pe02) by vie01a-dmta-pe04.mx.upcmail.net with esmtp (Exim 4.88) (envelope-from ) id 1dPmxu-0004hs-IS for wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:39:22 +0200 Received: from hiker (unknown [192.168.111.2]) by vala.local (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F2871C813D for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:39:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:39:06 +0200 From: Andrej Kacian To: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com Subject: Re: making wireguard work on RHEL7/etc. Message-ID: <20170627113906.391bb9a6.andrej@kacian.sk> In-Reply-To: References: <87o9tbuq7a.fsf@correspondwith.me> <20170627073521.22a725fc@penny> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/DOd3J__gx+1uiO9wxWNTakX"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --Sig_/DOd3J__gx+1uiO9wxWNTakX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 08:25:31 +0100 (BST) wireguard@wut.to wrote: > > I wonder - is it a good idea to depend on > > nonstandard, distribution-specific defines like this? This kind of > > modification IMHO belongs in a local patch applied during a rpmbuild > > for a RHEL/Centos package. =20 >=20 > I think that depends entirely on if you want it to be easy for users > to obtain and use your software. If it requires constant patching and > updates, most people won't bother and will use something else. Absolutely. I'm not saying these fixes are not needed, I merely expressed an opinion that their place is not in the main source code, but rather in a custom patch applied when creating packages for the affected distribution(s). Note that I am not in any way speaking for the project or its developers, I'm just an interested outsider. Regards, --=20 Andrej --Sig_/DOd3J__gx+1uiO9wxWNTakX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJZUie9AAoJEA9aNXUfa/YPdxkP/jjoB5TSKsCJqi/Ti8I5t4K8 H6RDHRS0J5mrjs2mi6BoOHpJ8IxztKKDAmrS2qg9uZI78d9rJQM3huhi2mdHRm2c orRP+E4NrMox+UaGAepc1eE+//UnxZTMxhNGuMHjS3Yj2DYuSqFZX2mSTPY312Rc XBIY7VNEK4jR+DjFxIqrVuuLKE1sYdqS2tAAnN9oNYa6PJgW97bJElQKH5Qb9vCV O/MrjEdExR0CNQwAzPWLAuSM8gN21tsKmLW0L+BKHIGXF2g/2yGxl3JaKCF7jWlt xbJSx8gJ8W2CrASK4nKQpOU4PFsq6wZwidghJKTg3rQ4REbyyLTcqddPVTK9xguC Q1SpiEdOgf23BGrpHHA3zSidwaiqE7TCb495soZFiVZ+WwDAb3FX4gg+sjWohz6T 2Ja3irOX++5w3c2sBvAsfUFbOSkCX/ghxL/a7iw7mnyq2nlJfQmLdbiA9mJji0Kj 2pFgwR5s9dMaYjuIlY09Ilov52QN9XJnSvvg0UwLMb8d/BwRrY6lV8FHRDoJACzr u/W1v7nLND/O3cwF3Gpe7GQEV1k0KooHBZXQ/tQFOEzc4/rqb527fJ4rutyYv6/U h/RGigW6kXSnqDjOYxJyqytFRxIxqOK2Z/g/jMTzAQj+iK9rSpRZU98MTwSBcSzk rtt5S5bcjadMWS9MdHsS =hSRa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/DOd3J__gx+1uiO9wxWNTakX--