On Oct 24, 2014, at 8:00 PM, Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I agree that a kext requires a higher degree of trust, I just don’t think a >> single-vendor signing regime is a net win for users. > > But that's what Apple's policy in Yosemite seems to be, and it has typically > been MacPorts strategy to attempt to adopt whatever policy changes Apple > makes as best we can. Historically, Apple’s technological/commercial interests have been more aligned with the requirements of MacPorts’ user base, and even then, MacPorts has shipped things that Apple no longer supported because those tools were still required by MacPorts' users. If someone wants to exercise their prerogative to install an unsigned kext, Apple has already added plenty of barriers. I don’t see what we have to gain by deleting the ports out from under them, too. -landonf
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
