Joerg Schilling writes: > I am in fear that Solaris cannot.... > > In the past years, Solaris stability rules have not been followed as usual > and > it seems this has been done because of lack of payed time inside Sun.
Please stop passing around FUD. If you can cite any point in which we haven't followed the rules, then name it explicitly. Otherwise, I would greatly appreciate it if you could stop bad-mouthing Solaris and OpenSolaris on these lists. For someone who claims to care about this project (and who participates in a lot of its mailing lists), you seem to spend a terrific amount of your time trying to tear it down. > I still cannot understand why a Sun controlled login (via PAM) depends on > Mozilla's /usr/lib/mps/libssl3.so but /usr/sbin/pkgadd depends on > /usr/sfw/lib/libssl.so.0.9.8 What on Earth does that have to do with stability rules? Is it impossible to consider that separate project teams might possibly have different technical or marketing contraints on their projects that could lead them to make different implementation choices? Or that they may have been designed at different times when certain options were not available? Or is there really One True SSL Implementation? If you've got a concern here, then please do contact the relevant community groups (they'd be security-discuss and install-discuss, respectively) or file a bug. Making wild claims and accusations against Sun's ability to follow its own rules is at least unhelpful, and probably also a waste of your time if you're expecting anyone to take these complaints seriously. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
