Hi David! David Zeuthen [2006-01-12 12:07 -0500]: > But... there's a world of difference from a local exploit that requires > you to be at the console... to one that doesn't require physical. True. > Calling hal dangerous in that sense is frankly not fair. Sorry, this was just a heated reaction to the 'crippled'. I apologize. Let's forget about this part, shall we? > I don't really have the time, the energy nor the inclination to argue > about this any more. *agree*, me neither. > I really do hope to see the patch from you or Matthew that splits > hald into two processes.. Yes, I'm sure we'll find a solution. Sjoerd Simons is already working at one, too. :) > with this, we can start shipping the same code. Only by doing this > we can pave the way for e.g. gfloppy to do useful things using HAL. > I'd hate to see Ubuntu do one thing and Red Hat and Novell another. > That would just be a waste of time. *nod* Thank you, Martin -- Martin Pitt http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntu.com Debian Developer http://www.debian.org In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature