From owner-freebsd-current Thu May 15 08:09:26 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA22718 for current-outgoing; Thu, 15 May 1997 08:09:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA22709 for ; Thu, 15 May 1997 08:09:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id IAA21150; Thu, 15 May 1997 08:09:25 -0700 (PDT) To: Nate Williams cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch), current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_2_2 In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 15 May 1997 08:58:36 MDT." <199705151458.IAA01189@rocky.mt.sri.com> Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 08:09:25 -0700 Message-ID: <21146.863708965@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > To make dtmail *NOT* corrupt email you must make the system less secure. But I'm not talking about making the system less secure in pursuit of this so your point is irrelevant. You would prefer I make dtmail suid root? Jeeze, get a clue, Nate! > > Further discussion with you is clearly pointless. > > Because you choose to ignore everyone and live in your own little world? > Discussion with you is pointless if you aren't willing to listen! No, because discussion with _you_ is pointless. I've discussed this rather more constructively with a number of others and we've since taken the discussion offline while we search for *solutions* rather than arguing this like a pair of debating society enthuiasiasts. Like so many of our little debates before, you're clearly less interested in making constructive contributions than you are in simply trying to toss sand in the gears and yes, we generally get to the point where I'm sick of playing straight man while Nate gets his rocks off arguing, not even particularly caring if the original point of debate is being resolved or not, and I say "ENOUGH! I don't want to waste my time with you anymore!" That's generally the point where you sniffily declare that I'm simply being autocratic if I don't care to waste my time playing your silly little games. Sorry Nate, it just doesn't work that way and this is the last message you'll see from me on this matter. As I said, I and others are already working on *fixing* this problem rather than debating it and if you're dead-set on wasting more time then I can only suggest a trip to the nearest video arcade. Jordan