> Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > I understand that you guys are having fun with this. If you think this > > > is actually an issue, though, it's probably a good idea to suggest an > > > FAQ change. "Generally reliable" is a pretty lukewarm review compared to > > > the current FAQ, which doesn't mention any downsides: > > > > > > http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq14.html > > > > > > However, some long-time project members find soft updates trustworthy: > > > > > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=142170287802566&w=2 > > > > > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=142174547612722&w=2 > > > > > > So a tempered warning would probably be best. > > > > Whoa there. > > > > We do not get bug reports of enough quality to determine what > > the people running into these problems are doing. > > > > Maybe they are just shooting themselves in the foot? > > > > Maybe people are using pf or ssh incorrectly and shooting themselves > > in the foot? Should we change documentation to clarify > > > > * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES > > * WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF > > * MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR > > * ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES > > * WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN > > * ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF > > * OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE. > > > > Come on Micheal. You could focus developer attention on improving > > software (which requires "power users" to file better bug reports). > > > > Instead, your comments here suggest developers change web pages. > > From my perspective, what I see is very frustrating. > > The additional problems that come with I/O errors are inherent to soft > updates rather than bugs in their implementation, no? > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=142250784228719&w=2 > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=142294185000751&w=2
Michael, unless the code gets fixed -- what is the difference? Who do you hold responsible? The FAQ or the code? If you hold the code responsible, what part will you play?
