Re: making wireguard work on RHEL7/etc.

["Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1148 bytes --]

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:39:06AM +0200, Andrej Kacian wrote:
> 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.  
> > 
> > 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).

compat.h is a dumpster fire already. Tons of people use the RHEL kernel.
I think supporting it won't make an already gross cess pool any more
disgusting. It's a file of hacks; I might as well add another.

(I probably won't add hacks, though, for the heaps of random custom
Android vendor kernels.)

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]