On 5/21/19 9:10 AM, Jesper Wallin wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 07:34:05AM +0200, Martijn van Duren wrote:
>> Hello Jesper,
>>
>> The behaviour should be identical, the only difference would be that
>> pledge catches programming errors. So I see no particular reason to use
>> -S over "set secure" for normal users; even without pledge.
>
> Yeah, vi will of course still tell the user that external commands are
> not allowed. My point was more the inconsistency in regards to pledge.
>
>> I choose not to fail hard on pledge, since that could loose peoples
>> work, which is most definitely not what we want. While here fix a
>> lie that secure has an off parameter and inform the user that it can't
>> be turned off again.
>
> Nice! Your patch is more elegant and good point about not failing hard.
>
>
> Jesper Wallin
>
Committed. Thanks for pointing this out.
