On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 12:58 +0200, Jonas Eckerman wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>
> > This is not about OpenProtect or their decisions. Actually, there are
> > more than this one sa-update mirror for the SARE rules.
>
> I think you missed my point. The OpenProtect channel adds a bunch of
> SARE rulesets in a single channel. This means that when you use that
> channel, you delegate the decision on which SARE rulesets to include to
> OpenProtect.
Indeed, I did miss your point. Thanks for clarifying.
> And of course they are not responsible for FPs. The person who
> configured a system to use their channel is responsible for resulting
> FPs (if any) in that system. Wich fits what I said to the OP as well.
*nod*
guenther
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
