On 8 October 2016 at 17:21, Xen <l...@xenhideout.nl> wrote: > Ralf Mardorf schreef op 06-10-2016 12:42: >> >> Just a very laste note. >> >> On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 22:29 +0200, Xen wrote: >>> >>> >> In Windows >>> >>> Yes you conveniently break off my statement but (I had to look for it) >>> it was about something that has *nothing* to do with security as it >>> dealth with network shares. >> >> >> Yes, you mentioned Windows allows to do this and that, but Linux >> doesn't, so I pointed out, that Windows is insecure and Linux isn't. I >> assume causality. There are reasons that Linux does work different to >> Windows. > > > And so whenever Linux can't do something, it is for security? Don't make me > laugh.
I think there is a difference between *can't* meaning is not able to and *won't allow* meaning there is something specifically stopping that from happening. The *won't allow* features are generally for security reasons. Colin -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
