On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 09:30:30AM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On Wed, 2022-12-28 at 16:20 +0200, Henrik K wrote: > > > > Common sense would ask that how is SPF harmful for the user? One would > > think it would be actually desirable like any other network lookups, that > > user might have accidentally left disabled? But sure, if this is the Gentoo > > way, so be it. I had enough of 90's linux flashbacks trying it for the > > first and last time today. :-) > > > > Well, SPF wasn't nearly as reliable in 2005 as it is now, and it pulls > in an extra dependency. > > Probably the best answer is that by having this ability, Gentoo > attracts the sort of user who likes to disable such things to save disk > space, shave off a few CPU cycles, or improve security. And then > there's a feedback loop wherein most of our users want to retain the > ability to control what gets installed/enabled.
Doesn't look too good for Gentoo packaging though, if since 2009 v310.pre and newer have been full of all sorts of plugins loaded. It's like nobody actually cared since most of the stuff is useful. :-)
