On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 07:53:07PM +0200, Toralf Förster wrote:
> On 04/16/2018 11:14 AM, Hanno Böck wrote:
> > There's also another question related to this: What's the future for
> > Gentoo hardened?
> > From what I can tell hardened consists of:
> > * the things that try to make it compatible
On 04/16/2018 11:14 AM, Hanno Böck wrote:
> There's also another question related to this: What's the future for
> Gentoo hardened?
> From what I can tell hardened consists of:
> * the things that try to make it compatible with grsec/pax
> (more or less obsolete).
> * things that are now in
On 2018-04-16 05:12 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 4/16/18 4:05 AM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
>> * Anthony G. Basile schrieb am 16.04.18 um 02:04 Uhr:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Hi Anthony,
>>
>> I vote for keeping PaX Support as I am still using it and might be doing
>> so in the future.
>>
>>
Hello, everyone.
The following packages are up for grabs due to the Enlightenment project
being disbanded:
app-doc/edox-data
dev-libs/efl
dev-python/python-efl
media-libs/elementary
media-libs/imlib2
media-plugins/emotion_generic_players
media-plugins/evas_generic_loaders
Il 16/04/2018 14:31, Anthony G. Basile ha scritto:
> On 4/16/18 5:14 AM, Hanno Böck wrote:
[snip]
>
>>
>> There's also another question related to this: What's the future for
>> Gentoo hardened?
>> From what I can tell hardened consists of:
>> * the things that try to make it compatible with
On 4/16/18 5:14 AM, Hanno Böck wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I honestly don't see how it would be feasible to maintain a feature
> that the developers maintaining it have access to.
I think you're missing a negation in there. Point well taken though.
>
> I get that this whole pax-thing embodies a huge
On 4/16/18 3:22 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Michał Górny wrote:
>
>> W dniu nie, 15.04.2018 o godzinie 20∶04 -0400, użytkownik
>> Anthony G. Basile napisał:
>>> The question then is, do we remove all this code? As thing stands,
>>> its just lint that serves no current
On 4/16/18 4:05 AM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> * Anthony G. Basile schrieb am 16.04.18 um 02:04 Uhr:
>> Hi everyone,
>
> Hi Anthony,
>
> I vote for keeping PaX Support as I am still using it and might be doing
> so in the future.
>
> Thanks ;)
> -Marc
>
How are you able to test? Do you have
Hi,
I honestly don't see how it would be feasible to maintain a feature
that the developers maintaining it have access to.
I get that this whole pax-thing embodies a huge part of Gentoo history
and it may feel hard for some to let it go. But things are how they are.
Regarding the fork states: I
* Anthony G. Basile schrieb am 16.04.18 um 02:04 Uhr:
> Hi everyone,
Hi Anthony,
I vote for keeping PaX Support as I am still using it and might be doing
so in the future.
Thanks ;)
-Marc
--
0xCA3E7BF67F979BE5 - F7FB 78F7 7CC3 79F6 DF07
6E9E CA3E 7BF6 7F97 9BE5
> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu nie, 15.04.2018 o godzinie 20∶04 -0400, użytkownik
> Anthony G. Basile napisał:
>> The question then is, do we remove all this code? As thing stands,
>> its just lint that serves no current purpose, so removing it would
>> clean things up.
W dniu nie, 15.04.2018 o godzinie 20∶04 -0400, użytkownik Anthony G.
Basile napisał:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Magnus (aka Zorry) and I have been talking about what to do with PaX in
> the Gentoo tree. A year ago, grsecurity.net upstream stopped providing
> open versions of their patches to the
12 matches
Mail list logo
