Peter Busser wrote: > Fair enough. But if I were to improve Debian, I would put PaX in the default > kernel source. If you were to improve Debian, you'd have spent the five minutes it takes to realize that the only two very ways of getting PaX in the default debian kernel source is to get PaX included upstream or to prove it's value by creating a popular and well tested patch. If you're not prepared to do things the Debian way, then you're not about to do things in or for Debian. I'd be interested to buy Microsoft, but I don't have the change today, the same way you're displaying interest in Debian. You're doing your own project because there you can do as you please, but you won't do anything for Debian by reiterating that Debian should do as you please as well. Others prefer to see what they can do to improve Debian by choosing ways to change stuff that actually work. Is understanding the difference really that hard? Regards T.
Attachment:
pgpJ04SG9EhZA.pgp
Description: PGP signature