From owner-freebsd-chat Thu May 13 13:11:57 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from hades.riverstyx.net (hq-port-89.harbour-dhcp-pool.infinetgroup.com [207.23.37.89]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EFD414D7F for ; Thu, 13 May 1999 13:11:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from unknown@riverstyx.net) Received: from localhost (unknown@localhost) by hades.riverstyx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA30984; Thu, 13 May 1999 13:17:42 -0700 Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 13:17:42 -0700 (PDT) From: To: Brett Glass Cc: chris@calldei.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD, GPL, the world today. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.37.19990513115251.0441b4a0@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Ewww. So, I assume you've got 'alias "rm=rm -i"' set on all your boxes? I hate that confirmation crap. It's the exact same thing... sprintf is better in many circumstances than a bounds checking similar function, as long as you have no tainted data that's being dealt with. Likewise, a taint-checking language/OS is going to be slower and less efficient than something like C/Unix, 'coz it relies on competent people behind the wheel. Sure, use good, safe bounds checking functions for EVERYTHING that you write. Just don't take that functionality away from those of us who can/need to use it. --- tani hosokawa river styx internet On Thu, 13 May 1999, Brett Glass wrote: > At 12:48 PM 5/13/99 -0500, Chris Costello wrote: > > >Moronic practices by the human "component" doesn't make the > >product any less good. I can use Unix to screw up my disk > >drives, does that mean Unix is a bad thing? > > Only if it does it without asking. > > --Brett > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message