From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JmN37-0004Gn-Mq for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 05:52:45 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 61E98E04B7; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 05:52:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp8-g19.free.fr (smtp8-g19.free.fr [212.27.42.65]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36F4EE04B7 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 05:52:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp8-g19.free.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp8-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA7317F528 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:52:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.0.13] (bne75-10-88-178-16-229.fbx.proxad.net [88.178.16.229]) by smtp8-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69A6717F52D for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:52:43 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4806E4E3.3080909@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:49:23 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?UsOpbWkgQ2FyZG9uYQ==?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080213) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: escaping variables in sed expressions References: <48048E31.6040209@gentoo.org> <3c32af40804150405qb2bbfbavb8d7ce575dbc2278@mail.gmail.com> <20080415141753.GS29406@der-frank.org> <20080415171606.6e2a900a.genone@gentoo.org> <20080416171751.GT29406@der-frank.org> <20080416182405.651698dd@snowcone> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 39f0f09a-c1a8-4d22-9664-4771a25cda0c X-Archives-Hash: fe7f81744a8505d85f721ac04890b250 Duncan a =C3=A9crit : > Whatever your faults, you /do/=20 > tend to be quite accurate on such things. Wow, you've managed to turn a nice technical discussion (which is rare=20 enough in recent history) into a let's-start-bashing-people thread. You've lost all credibility in just one sentence... Pity. > If it's correct, it's certainly worth considering before one starts=20 > making absolutist assumptions and statements that could be wrong in som= e=20 > cases, particularly as such bad assumptions seem to often lead ultimate= ly=20 > to security faults. Well gee, thanks for "considering" Gentoo security, I feel so much=20 better now. Seriously though, please leave the condescending tone of your post at=20 the door. This post of yours is seriously out of line (imho). Thanks R=C3=A9mi --=20 gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list