From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QpBxe-0006NS-Rh for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 05 Aug 2011 04:24:38 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 86C6121C11A; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 04:24:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com (mail-vw0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F12BD21C10C for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 04:23:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vws13 with SMTP id 13so2328676vws.40 for ; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 21:23:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=N3nY5KsoFT5g/iFe3vxWtpc7HUSDCwtYp7X8JAMTEww=; b=A9gJO9479oZEaRqH/JKZnrK5l/uGhr4wX760/zSOZfybw83HDrkAzaaixb8FyEohMX lWgsfYimLQK0dKm9c/2Bm2UPct74lUKYyZHM0aBsOoG0NovKOmWTk/kGeBSuhhH+VB0H g89A+AwjugHDhwmWEWJyUVxPQR/o+c8R5bblE= Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.67.12 with SMTP id j12mr1754173vdt.213.1312518182427; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 21:23:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.189.197 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 21:23:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E3B6BF6.4090801@asyr.hopto.org> References: <4E3B6BF6.4090801@asyr.hopto.org> Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 14:23:02 +1000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] www-client/chromium From: Adam Carter To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 388994d6fb59514a7c64484addf8eda6 On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Thanasis wrote: > I noticed that chromium's code has a lot of vulnerabilities. > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=www-client%2Fchromium > I suppose this is why we see so often version upgrades of it (and it's > not a small app to build). > Why is its code so, should I say prone to bugs, compared to > other browsers? You've made an assumption there. Correlation implies causation? Perhaps there's more bugs found because of the bounties paid? Or maybe its because the code is newer than the alternatives.... I don't think its possible to make a judgement based on the information I have.