On 9 Oct, Mark Murray wrote: >> This really doesn't matter to me (ports vice base). I was reacting to >> the "rot of the code" comments. I also don't have a (major) problem that >> this patch was never committed -- there are other more important things >> for the committers to work on. :-) > > "Rot" applies more to design, rather than implementation. These games > are _old_. They may be classics, and they may be fun, but there are > much more modern games in ports, that I dare say folks play much more > often. :-) > >> I would hope that if these are moved to ports, then (at least) these >> patches would be applied when the tarballs are created.... > > I have no problems with this.
I'll also note (for completeness) that NetBSD just released a security advisory about rogue: ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/security/advisories/NetBSD-SA2002-021.txt.asc I briefly looked at this and the FreeBSD code appears to be the same. Of course, I'm not sure what getting a shell with a GID of games really gets you.... My point here, I guess, is that moving these games to ports probably lets us enhance the security of the base system.... Thanks, -- Stephen J. Roznowski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
