previously on this list Vincent Lefevre contributed: > > Plus, crashing in a screensaver is bad :D > > The sanitizers should be used only for testing / debugging, or > possibly for critical applications where it may be better to crash > (in a controlled way) than behave erratically with possible system > compromission as a consequence.
I am not sure exactly what checks you are talking about but isn't this debatable in that if it is more likely to crash early or immediately then the bugs are more likely to be fixed and it could have crashed later anyway at a more critical and less analysed time or led to greater consequences or bugs present in more critical deployments. OpenBSD catches many bugs but they are not the size of Debian which could catch more. Perhaps there is an argument just for testing as oppose to stable? -- _______________________________________________________________________ '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/113866.98512...@smtp113.mail.ir2.yahoo.com