Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > > I think the reason this comes up is because LFS is made up of a > limited number of developers (essentially hobbyists) that don't have > the time and resources to track down all security issues.
I think the term hobbyist as used here is somewhat misleading. Everyone involved in developing LFS/BLFS has quite a few years of professional computer work and some have advanced degrees in Computer Science. It's true that no one is paid for LFS work directly, but the term "hobbyist" implies amateur or less than "professional" knowledge. That is definitely not true. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
