On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 08:20:38AM +0100, Roberto E. Vargas Caballero wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 08:14:25PM -0300, Gleydson Soares wrote: > > the following patch brings support for OpenBSD's unveil(2) mechanism for > > ii. > > Guys, we should stop sending this kind of patches. If we begin to > fill all the suckless projects with #ifdef __OpenBSD__, why do we not > fill them with #ifdef __linux__? > > If this patch is accepted then I will send a patch to add suppport > for selinux and other one to add support for capsicum. All these > patches must go to the patches section and not in the main > repo. > > Regards, >
I think you have a good point. Maybe we should revert the pledge(2) changes and put them on the wiki. The patches could be maintained separately and added to the OS ports. What is the community opinion about this? dmenu, dwm and st exact behaviour makes it harder to map because of the underlying libraries. For example lazy-loading of fallback fonts further in the code (rpath). Furthermore unveil(2) is currently only in -current and it is being "tuned" at the moment afaik. Thanks for the patches though! -- Kind regards, Hiltjo
