The following reply was made to PR port-xen/29887; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Martin Husemann <martin@duskware.de>
To: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@netbsd.org>
Cc: YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp>, jhawk@MIT.EDU,
	gnats-bugs@netbsd.org, port-xen-maintainer@netbsd.org,
	netbsd-bugs@netbsd.org, tech-userlevel@netbsd.org
Subject: Re: port-xen/29887: sysctl kern.consdev coredumps
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 09:20:45 +0200

 On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 03:48:39PM -0700, Bill Studenmund wrote:
 > I agree actually DOING (well, trying to do) something 
 > with a NULL pointer should go boom.
 
 Printing the string content pointed to by the NULL pointer is not "trying to
 do something"? I realy don't understand this differentation, sorry.
 
 > If we really are ok with it (as evidenced by the fact we
 > changed man pages and code), then we shouldn't forbid it in the style
 > guide.
 
 Well, in the man pages I have it is not documented, and since this
 discussion did not reach consensus I'm not sure we realy are ok with it.
 
 > The reason why I object to such a change is that I've worked with code
 > that has strong-NULL-protection around printf(). I've written it. I've had
 > to maintain it. And it was irritating.
 
 You have to be carefull about null pointer for every pointer operation. I do
 not see the difference for printf.
 
 Martin