Re: Merging feature/android

[Po Lu]

Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> writes:

> On 2023-03-05 04:13, Po Lu wrote:
>
>> I'm not aware of a serious security bug in Google GCC or Clang which
>> affects compiled code.
>
> That wasn't the sort of security bug I was worried about. By not
> supporting these obsolete NDKs, Google is saying that apps built for
> older Android versions are unreliable or insecure or whatever. We
> can't expect users to fix those old Android bugs, and we likely lack
> resources to modify Emacs to work around them.

Security problems shouldn't be specific to the version of the NDK you
build with, since all symbols are in /system/lib/libc.so.  Android
doesn't do symbol versioning AFAIK.

> Is this referring to Replicant 6? Though I know little about
> Replicant, I suspect it'll be better for everyone concerned if
> Replicant 11 is the porting target, as that's where active Replicant
> development is (even though no official version has been
> released). Replicant 6 is pretty old and has known and seemingly
> unfixable security issues.

I'd rather we stop arguing about this, but please keep in mind that my
stance on Android version support will not change, since I see people
using old, unsupported versions every day.