[jckarter]

Orthogonal to bloat, libstdc++ is a large, ugly, and hard-to-audit attack surface that I'm sure OpenBSD is glad to push out of core.

[tedunangst]

libstdc++ remains as much a part of core as it ever was.

[wnoise]

But if nothing links with it, so there are no executables using it, that would seem to reduce the attack surface.

[tedunangst]

The attack surface of "there is groff in /usr/bin" was never very substantial.

[wnoise]

Get root to run "man foo" with the right manpath...

[jckarter]

I see. So does this purge only consist of compiled executables then, with the standard C++ headers and libstdc++ still getting a pass?

[tedunangst]

I think it's rather sad that HN has mostly ignored the meat of this story, and is instead focusing on a not entirely true one line throwaway.

[jckarter]

Sad, but understandable. "OpenBSD writes their own ROFF interpreter" isn't very interesting, but "OpenBSD purges C++ from core" appeals to developers' strong emotional responses toward C++.

[JoachimSchipper]

Yes. And it's not so much a C++ purge as it is a "unmaintainable GPL-licensed slow software" purge, as far as I understand. C++ does hurt comprehension, but it's not the main complaint.

[j_baker]

Wait... so then libstdc++ isn't written in C++? Or is "core" different from "base"?

[tedunangst]

Option 3: core/base is not actually free of C++.