Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      10 Sep 2000 00:59:40 -0700
From:      asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami)
To:        Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        ports@FreeBSD.org, qa@FreeBSD.org, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp
Subject:   Re: Making XFree86-4 the default
Message-ID:  <vqc3dj8vfrn.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
In-Reply-To: Kris Kennaway's message of "Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:51:34 -0700 (PDT)"
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009100047210.2960-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
 * From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>

 * Well, I'd prefer the list of "people concerned about security of the
 * server" to include the ports wraith :-) It's not going to help us if
 * theres another vulnerability discovered in X 4 which could have been
 * prevented by an xwrapper.

Sorry, your Ports Wraith just upgraded to 4.0.1 and is happily running
an setuid XFree86.... ;)

Kidding aside, if you think it is really necessary, why don't we
include Xwrapper from 3.3.6 (we can make a separate port for this) as
a requirement for a 4.0.1 Xserver?  Will that work?

 * As for PAM, I suspect it would require an understanding of the access and
 * authentication mechanisms in X, which I don't have.

Hmm.

 * Yep. John Baldwin was talking about doing a QA cycle anyway, and the
 * target date of Sep 21 seemed later than he was wanting anyway.

What do you say, John? :)

Satoshi


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?vqc3dj8vfrn.fsf>