Eugene Grosbein wrote:
David Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's your choice, but from a security perspective, this worries me.
You will have applications you are using linked against FreeBSD
libraries that no longer have any FreeBSD security team support.
[skip]
The definite need to keep the system secure is another and distinct
matter from the need of binary backwards compatibility for userland.
In no way the former cancels the latter.
Eugene Grosbein
_______________________________________________
Looks like I shipped my S-100 gear to the wrong guy.
The ability to build from source and have access to source, is prized among the
experienced not so much because we fear hidden 'gotcha's from the malicious or
even proprietary vendor lock-in - but more for the ability to *see* what breaks,
rapidly locate and apply already-known fixes, or ask for expert assistance when
new ones are needed.
And in less time and lower cost than it takes the average bear to acknowledge,
find, and fix closed-source. Witness IBM, Sun, HP, Apple et al adoption of a
large measure of F/OSS. They can no longer afford to do otherwise.
All that precisely because taking even limited advantage of progress makes the
delivery of binary backwards compatibility - much as we may want it and strive
for it - contrary to progress, and an impracticality in the real world.
Deal with that as best you can. ELSE revert to the last century and run Windows.
Bill
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
