Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
This won't affect my inclination to resubscribe, but I don't think a retraction from LWN would be out of order.
McGee: The real story behind Arch Linux package signing
Posted Mar 25, 2011 2:29 UTC (Fri) by ewan (subscriber, #5533)
At the moment it just feels like a case of "he said"/"she said" - we could do with a credibly authoritative take.
Posted Mar 25, 2011 9:57 UTC (Fri) by bo (subscriber, #56215)
Posted Mar 25, 2011 16:17 UTC (Fri) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)
"Very evident axe to grind"? I don't see any "axe grinding" going on; this is an extremely serious security problem for Arch users, that just isn't being addressed by the distribution, as pointed out by LWN. Sure, the original complainant doesn't come across as exactly the most handsome and sharp messenger, but the message stands regardless.
Posted Mar 25, 2011 16:31 UTC (Fri) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)
So it is now out of line to comment that on $MAILLIST there is a flamefest, and summarize the positions stated there... Or perhaps the crime is to hint that the problem being discussed is serious and isn't handled by $POWERS_THAT_BE?
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds