Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 14:55:12 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch), current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_2_2 Message-ID: <199705142055.OAA28492@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <17372.863642768@time.cdrom.com> References: <199705141614.KAA27066@rocky.mt.sri.com> <17372.863642768@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Making us work with vendors is *less* important than opening FreeBSD up > > for security holes. Go re-read all of the arguements for/against the > > I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how this change opens > FreeBSD up to anything - all I see is a lot of scare-mongering but > no technical "meat" in this argument. See below, and go re-read all of the arguments again (which you've seemed to have ignored). > > > Now you're just being silly and ignoring the fact that you've changed > > (and probably broken) the way mail is handled in stock FreeBSD if people > > "Probably" - you're going to have to do better than that. Mail locking, as already been said *many* times. However, depending on usage, it may not bite anyone, or then again it might. It's kind of like serving your mail spool over NFS, most of the time it works, but sometimes it totally corrupts your mbox. That's the primary reason, although there are also other minor problems as well. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705142055.OAA28492>