From: stan (stanbpanix.com)
Date: Thu Jan 01 2004 - 17:03:11 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 05:27:30PM -0500, Chuck Yerkes wrote:
> Quoting stan (stanbpanix.com):
> > On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 11:01:38AM -0700, Sancho2k.net Lists wrote:
> > > stan wrote:
> ...
>
> Well, that's fine, except its WRONG. The compile tools are
> in comp.34.tgz. Think there might be a reason?

OK, so short of reinstallling from scratch how would one easliy remove what
is already unpacked from that tarball?

>
> > and I used to work on comercial UNIX machines that did not have the
> > compiler on them :-( What a mess.
>
> I've done this game for a while. I've run firewalls for 10+ years
> (starting with home grown with screend, then DEC SEAL and later
> FWTK).
>
> We did not keep compilers on firewalls. Yeah, a little obscurity.
> security SOLELY relying on obscurity is stupid. But this was
> part of may things. (also trust me, SunOS 4's compiler was best
> used to get gcc running. SGI? well, they're just SGI who used to
> charge for NFS; only SCO used to do that and we all knew they weren't
> a real).

and HP's compiler is among the best I've ever seen. So, it dpends on your
vendor. BTW, I agree abou Sun's compiler.

> Then you have a production box. This is where your stuff runs that has
> to be there and running.
>
> If you just have one box, then it's a development box. If you believe
> otherwise, then the first time you install something that screws it up,
> you'll realized the truth.

True enogh.

--
"They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety."
                                                -- Benjamin Franklin

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]