3 ms·
> I can confidently claim that upstream has better policies. Debian has thousands of different upstream, you don't even know who they are, how can you claim to
by guappa 2y ago
> I can confidently claim that upstream has better policies.
Debian has thousands of different upstream, you don't even know who they are, how can you claim to know their policies and to have evaluated all of them?
Also, all the 1 person projects do not get fixes in a timely manner. As you would understand if there was any amount of reasoning behind your arguments.
Are you done making stuff up or must you continue?
> Also the Debian SSL key bug
1. Shit happens
2. If you want random data you read from /dev/random, an uninitialised buffer is NOT random.
3. If your example dates to over a decade ago, I'd say the track record is excellent.
- lmm 2y ago> Debian has thousands of different upstream, you don't even know who they are, how can you claim to know their policies and to have evaluated all of them? Thousands of upstreams yes, thousands for security-critical software no. > 2. If you want random data you read from /dev/random, an uninitialised buffer is NOT random. That's not what was happening. Now who's making stuff up? > 3. If your example dates to over a decade ago, I'd say the track record is excellent. The worst bug in regular software had to happen at some point in time, it happens to have happened over a decade at all. It's not like Debian's record has been spotless since then.
- guappa 2y ago> Thousands of upstreams yes, thousands for security-critical software no. Everything is security critical. > That's not what was happening. Now who's making stuff up? You, who didn't read the mailing list exchange > The worst bug in regular software had to happen at some point in time ??? How did you classify it? Were there any other contenders? Can you share which contenders were there?