Ted Unangst, Well, I don't think I need to articulate anymore why CGD ought to make it in. I already have stated my reasons, so I won't do it again. But there is something I'm lacking from you:
I think YOU need to articulate why CGD is not making it in. Why is the burden of proof on me? After all, YOU ported it in the first place! YOUr desire preceded mine. YOU thought using CGD was good long before I ever did. Was there some reason behind this? Was there reason behind then using svnd? Am I to think you're a man sans reason? You clearly think svnd is a better solution, but why? I'm sure you have some really good reasons. Perhaps if you _*share them with us, we will finally understand and stop bitching about it*_. If you take up the burden of proof, then you won't have to deal with pesky little threads such as this. Otherwise, if you continue with your typical behavior, I shall cast my vote of no confidence. OpenBSD is cited by some people as psychotic--the code audits, the stack protection: ProPolice, W^R; secure by default, the development of OpenSSH, the constant vigilance... You tell us that svnd is good enough. Perhaps for you. Rather, the paper detaling the design of CGD speaks of crypto implementations strong enough to use on hard disks at the Los Alamos research labs (several of which went missing.) Where would OpenBSD be? if people said "it's good enough," rather than "lets do the best job we can do." I'm very impressed with the design of OpenBSD, even the selection of software in the base system rocks my socks. Yet, svnd seems like a blight on an otherwise perfect OS. Travers On Tuesday 03 January 2006 14:37, Ted Unangst wrote: > On 1/2/06, Travers Buda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You've made it very clear that CGD won't be imported into OpenBSD, > > yet you've never explained why, or why you ported it in the first > > place. > > > > Care to let us in on why? I expect your reply will be a short "no" > > just like a few of your replys to this subject. For what it is > > worth, I'm asking. > > Because, like everyone else, you've failed to pass the articulation > test. > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-misc&m=112534721521131&w=2
