178 karma · joined December 11, 2018
Current users will have their install broken and need to google to figure out what is going on.
Future users will install `keepassxc` thinking it would be actually KeePassXC before potentially realizing its a minimal version.
Personally I think splitting it into `keepassxc-full` and `keepassc-minimal` would be better since it moves the choice to the user instead of implying the contents.
The functions related to Internet are:
- getting the favicon for a specific entry (needs to be ran manually with an option to download via a DuckDuckGo proxy)
- checking entries against HIBP (needs to be done manually in a submenu with a giant notice)
Also this is about KeePassXC not KeePass which is a completely different project. There is also KeePassX, KeePassDX, KeeWeb, KeePass-electron and so on and so forth.
Especially in C, where a lot of data is passed through pointers, you'd want to make sure the data you are given isn't pointing to nothing and can't always rely on the callee doing it for you.
I think you interpreted Linus wrong. When he says "we do not break userspace" he is talking about the Kernel APIs that are exposed to the Userland.
Userland APIs would be stuff like glibc, which has a terrible track record in regards to API breakage.
If only the compiler you are still on very shaky grounds with -Werror.
Even for the Linux kernel devs -Werror is too harsh.
Let us throw away all the existing code written in languages made in a different age and use languages that are completely binary incompatible just because we can.
Also, don't use -Werror if you can Warnings will change based on compiler, compiler version and a countless number of other factors that make working with code that turns them into errors a pain.
Its pretty annoying to add another moving piece to the machinery just to do that.
A good 'ol gun to the head does the same job for cheaper plus it takes care of the root of the problem
I dont think the change was inherently bad but just ham fisting it into the release without widely announcing that the ABI will change is a massive failure on the glibc teams end.
maybe when WSL starts actually being Linux instead of just a cobbled together mess running under the NT kernel
Compared to alternatives like Lutris is nice to use and has little redundancy
Most contributions are from drive by contributor's that may not even use the project.
Neither those nor the maintainer are entitled to compensation, but open source is a cruel environment where people want to use what you made but they wouldnt give you a dime unless they had to
As I see it the dev asked the void and got no negative feedback.
Afterwards the void grew legs and started running after him
Yes Technically true, and you can use it like it in a few places but they are far from the same.
At best the community can stand up and fork which means they have to move ownership to some rando
It does not enforce how a project is run or distributed.
If the author of is-even deleted his package who can tell him he is in the wrong?