Re: Why would I want an LFS system?
[I haven't subscribed to this list yet, so if you will, please CC me. Else
I'll pick up replies via online mail.archives when they become available]
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:27:10PM +0100, Csan (Ja'nos Hola'nyi) wrote:
> > "Another advantage of a custom built Linux system is added security. You
> > will compile the entire system from source, thus allowing you to audit
> > everything, if you wish to do so, and apply all the security patches you
> > want or need to apply.
> > You don't have to wait for somebody else to provide a new binary package
> > that fixes a security hole. Besides, you have no guarantee that the new
> > package actually fixes the problem (adequately)."
> This is the most serious fallacy. The Debian security team is probably
> more thorough than most of the LFS users.
There's nothing in my mind that doubt they are. My point still stands: if
you download a precompiled package, you don't have much of a guarantee that
patches are applied to the source that created those binaries. You'll have
to fully trust on that package maintainers word that a patch has been
included, unless of course patches offer a way to be queried when compiled
into. Some do, so if all debian patches do that nowadays then I'll withdraw
my claim for Debian.
> Most of the LFS users I've encountered seem to fit this mold:
> <Overfiend> "*PANT* *PANT* YEAH BABY!!!! FRESH COMMITS TO CVS!!!!"
> *PANT* *PANT*
May I ask where you get that idea from? Don't you think you are
exaggerating just a little bit here? Like you guys don't get 'happy' when
fixes are commited to CVS so the public can try out improved Debian
components.
--
Gerard Beekmans
www.linuxfromscratch.org
-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
Reply to: