Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:27:29 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Unable to compile cygwin Message-ID: <20031222192729.GA30356@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <20031222164832.GC2545@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-IsSubscribed: yes Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 11:15:34AM -0800, Shankar Unni wrote: >Jim Ramsay wrote: >>Ha! Ask that boss to prove to you that there is no security problem >>running Windows on a 'secure' network. > >To a person with that mentality, Bill Gates is implicitly trustworthy >(i.e. if he says it's true, it must be true by definition, because >it's a "big company that stands by its products"), while anything Open >Source is written by h4x0rs and thus must "prove its trustworthiness". > >How, you ask them? They don't know, but you'd better "know". No point >arguing with them.. Proving the trustworthiness of any important system is never a waste of time. Let me state again, for the record: cygwin is not secure. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/