Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 16:47:19 +1000 From: "Robert Backhaus" <robbak@gmail.com> To: "Colin Percival" <cperciva@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Survey Message-ID: <d4499580605212347h79ecd0cfn45d51e90d177b98a@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4471361B.5060208@freebsd.org> References: <4471361B.5060208@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 5/22/06, Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> wrote: > > If you administrate system(s) running FreeBSD (in the broad sense of "are > responsible for keeping system(s) secure and up to date"), please visit > http://people.freebsd.org/~cperciva/survey.html > and complete the survey below before May 31st, 2006. > One of those "Missing Option" messages: Whether valid or not, the reason that I would avoid a binary update system is that I customise CPUTYPE, and believe, rightly or wrongly, that this would make binary updating impossible. Of course, the main reason I would not use binary updating you/they have made source updating so easy!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d4499580605212347h79ecd0cfn45d51e90d177b98a>