Re: itp: static bins / resolving static debian issues
This entire post is flamage, with absolutely no arguments of substance, or
even sense. If you want to be heard, perhaps you could explain yourself
better, with less profanity?
-- Nathaniel
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 08:39:46AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 22, 1999 at 06:01:31PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
> > * Nathaniel Smith said:
> >
> > > First, the security: while it may be theoretically possible to put wrappers
> > > around passwd and so on, ensuring that the two accounts are kept in sync is
> > [snip]
> > > exists at all. This of course might be an acceptable cost if it gained us
> > > a great deal, but I maintain that it does not.
> > Well, as Justin has noted that extra account may be disabled. And only
> > the administrator who a) wants to use it, b) is conscious of all the
> > extra effort would enable it.
>
> this thing has turned around to a ridiculous degree in the last
> day or so. consensus has been established that having an optional
> static binaries package wouldn't be such a bad thing. note that word
> "optional".
>
> stop and think for a minute: YOU and Justin and one or two others are
> the ones who want the static shell etc....yet you somehow think that it
> is EVERYONE ELSE who has to fuck around with their systems to get it
> BACK to the way it was before.
>
> NO FUCKING WAY!
>
> You want something extra, something optional...that's fine. just don't
> try to force it on everyone else.
>
> if you want to run freebsd with their root and toor account, then go and
> run freebsd - don't try to make debian into a clone.
>
> craig
>
> --
> craig sanders
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: