From owner-cvs-all Sun Apr 30 20:36:27 2000 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED3B837B662; Sun, 30 Apr 2000 20:36:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6]) by rover.village.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA08966; Sun, 30 Apr 2000 21:36:22 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.9.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id VAA74137; Sun, 30 Apr 2000 21:36:12 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200005010336.VAA74137@harmony.village.org> To: Chuck Robey Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/XFree86-4 Makefile Cc: Kris Kennaway , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 30 Apr 2000 13:58:30 EDT." References: Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 21:36:12 -0600 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message Chuck Robey writes: : I think that's going to have to be done; we CAN'T be without an X11 port, : too many things depend directly on X. We can shout and howl, and do local : FreeBSD fixes, but X is too important to remove, don't you see? If it were the only X port, I'd agree with you. We have an X port based on XFree86 3.x. We don't NEED one based on 4.x if there are major security porblems in 4.x. There is time to sort this out, but in the mean time I support Kris' marking it as FORBIDDEN. We're not near a release, and it will get hammered out over the next few weeks I'm sure. But in the mean time, we want people to be inconvenienced to build the port so they know the risks they are exposing themselves to. Put another way, X is too fundamental to the system to have holes. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message