On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:43:03 -0500
Bobby Powers <bobbypow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can you explain your thinking here on security? Is it just that less
> compiled code == more secure?
No, it's just my problem with hotplugging input-devices. As my setup
doesn't change (I only have a mouse and keyboard), the respective
x-drivers are sufficient ;).
And of course, it saves some KB from the Kernel.
> Have you looked much at Weston? PAM integration is limited to 1 file
> & 3 functions, and could be trivially excised.
Then I wonder why they don't make it optional as a Compiler-Flag.
> How is this different from the tinyx project you mentioned? Ah,
> right, you like tinyx.
tinyx backports security-patches for X, so it's not a one-man's job.
However, I really have to include Hadrian's response here:
>> $ find swc -iname "*.[ch]" -exec cat '{}' \; | wc -l
>> 8350
>> $ find tinyxserver -iname "*.[ch]" -exec cat '{}' \; | wc -l
>> 235126
, which is definitely a fair point to make.
It may have been to much of a rant in my previous mail. I'm always open
to learn new things about Wayland!
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN <d...@frign.de>
