Re: Discussion about why GNU/Linux system upgrades cause old programs to break

> From: Richard Stallman <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
> Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 23:39:12 -0400
> 
> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> 
>   > > > It wasn't broken back when Emacs 24.1 was released, or at least we
>   > > > weren't aware of that.  It's only the latest GCC releases quite
>   > > > arbitrarily decided that -std=gnu99 means to reject any program that
>   > > > does not strictly conforms to C99.  Previously, -std=gnu99, unlike
>   > > > -std=c99, always allowed useful deviations from the standard.
>   > > 
>   > > The latter sentence is interesting.  It implies that -std=gnu99 no
>   > > longer permits a useful deviation from the standard, but that's simply
>   > > not the case.
>   > > 
>   > > It no longer permits a certain deviation that was, through experience,
>   > > seen to be far more harmful than useful.
> 
>   > IOW, you've redefined "useful" to suit the point you want to make.
>   > How does this add any useful insights to this discussion?
> 
> What, _concretely_, was the change that you two are expressing
> different judgments about?

The change in GCC which made K&R syntax an error rather than a
warning.