On 2 March 2014 10:53:51 WET, Jack wrote:
>Systemd scares me. As far as I can see it does a lot of things right
>(in
>some cases these are things that no other contender does right); I'm
>not
>going to try to enumerate those things, that's been one elsewhere. But
>the way systemd has been designed
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:17 AM, intrigeri wrote:
> I need a reality check, as it's unclear to me what are the goals of
> this discussion.
I don't think there are any goals. I asked it just to understand if it
would be possible to do what I was thinking (apparently, it is) and the
discussion con
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 10:12:40AM +0200, Heimo Stranner wrote:
>
>> I think the real issue is about if the malicious patch is not part of
>> the source package
>>
>
> Why? It certainly makes your argument simpler if you arbitrarily restrict
I am really sorry if you think it's rude to start a topic here without
subscribing. I thought that it was acceptable, since a lot of people do it
in debian-users (I know it has a lot more volume than this one) and it's
the default action when you click on "Reply to All" in most clients (well,
proba
I was reading this [1] article and it brought a question do my mind: How
hard would it be for the FBI or the NSA or the CIA to have a couple of
agents infiltrated as package mantainers and seeding compromised packages
to the official repositories?
Could they submit an uncompromised source and keep
5 matches
Mail list logo
