> You are trying to make a big fuss about this for no good reason.
Ingo, please. it was *you* who objected to PaX's default enforcement
policy because it broke Linus's rule. yet you did the same with your
own default *and* contested the fact that you hadn't broken anything.
i don't have a problem with your choice for default policies, i have
a problem when you have a double standard ('kettos merce' in your
mother tongue).- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX pageexec
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Ingo Molnar
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX pageexec
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Cameron Patrick
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Ingo Molnar
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX pageexec
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Ingo Molnar
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Ingo Molnar
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX pageexec
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Ingo Molnar
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX pageexec
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Ingo Molnar
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Ingo Molnar
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Graham Wilson
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Cameron Patrick
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Francesco P. Lovergine
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Yven Johannes Leist
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Henning Makholm
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Russell Coker
- Re: Exec-Shield vs. PaX Daniel Jacobowitz

