full-disclosure - [OT] Re: Knocking Microsoft

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20040228162221.GA967@sentinelchicken.org>
From: tim-security at sentinelchicken.org (Tim)
Subject: [OT] Re: Knocking Microsoft

> Yeah, that's *way* easier than FreeBSD's %make install clean.

The ports heirarchy is great for what it is.  But it doesn't do a lot of
things necessary for keeping high-availability when it comes time to
patch your daemons on 20+ systems.  Now, I haven't used FreeBSD since
4.X days, so maybe they have fixed some of the brain damage, but in a
system that it is possible to install the same port over the top of
itself...  Ever installed a new version of a port on top of an old one,
then tried removing the old one?  Doesn't work too well.  Ever tried
maintaining systems with both ports and packages?  IIRC, it doesn't work
so well either.  The time to compile is also a pain (but can be remedied
if you compile into a package on a *dedicated* build server).

Don't get me wrong, FreeBSD's ports system is WAY better than dependency
handling on windoze (if you can even call it that), and is perfectly
sufficient if you only have a few boxes to maintain.

cheers,
tim