Re: git: 860ce9aee61a - main - security/picocrypt: Whitelist 64-bit archs

Hello Alexey,

Yes you are right, blacklist is shorter and best option to use since list
will be smaller in the future.

NOT_FOR_ARCHS= i386 armv6 armv7 mips powerpc powerpcspe

Coul you take a look before I commit?

Thanks,
Nuno

Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> escreveu no dia terça, 27/09/2022 à(s)
03:36:

> On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 07:03:46PM +0000, Nuno Teixeira wrote:
> > commit 860ce9aee61aacd34f0b1c29d54f44dd86168835
> >
> >   security/picocrypt: Whitelist 64-bit archs
>
> This is not the best approach, I'll elaborate more on this below.
>
> >   - Upstream only supports 64-bit
>
> Can they be convinced to enable it again?  When I first ported this
> program it definitely compiled everywhere, albeit I don't recall if
> I tried to run it on my i386 desktop.
>
> > +ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=      amd64 arm64 mips64 powerpc64 powerpc64le riscv64
> sparc64
> > +ONLY_FOR_ARCHS_REASON=       upstream only supports 64-bit
>
> 64-bit list is more likely to change than 32-bit and is also much shorter
> (i386, arv{6,7}), so if you prefer arch limitation over fixing the bug than
> NOT_FOR_ARCHS is better as it entails less churn over time.  Also, support
> for sparc64 is pretty much dropped (and even when it was kind of supported,
> we stopped building packages for it for a long time), less sure of mips64
> but I think it had been phased out in src land recently as well.
>
> ./danfe
>


-- 
Nuno Teixeira
FreeBSD Committer (ports)