From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chris Moore Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: C file recoginzed as image file Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 00:56:59 +0100 Message-ID: References: <45A2D32A.8020804@gmail.com> <45A3650B.80504@gmail.com> <45A3771B.5070108@gnu.org> <45A38409.9080402@gmail.com> <45A40F63.5070605@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1168387047 14718 80.91.229.12 (9 Jan 2007 23:57:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 23:57:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , c.a.rendle@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 10 00:57:25 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H4QqF-0000X1-Un for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2007 00:57:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H4QqF-0005tn-Jp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:57:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H4Qq5-0005rs-4x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:57:09 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H4Qq3-0005nz-M4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:57:08 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H4Qq3-0005nm-Jm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:57:07 -0500 Original-Received: from [66.249.92.173] (helo=ug-out-1314.google.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1H4Qq3-0002Xi-5X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:57:07 -0500 Original-Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j3so7492991ugf for ; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:57:06 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:to:cc:references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type:x-sa-exim-connect-ip:x-sa-exim-mail-from:x-spam-checker-version:x-spam-level:x-spam-status:subject:x-sa-exim-version:x-sa-exim-scanned:sender; b=CdyDu0vnc800py37jI2WL1NijTM/uKnkEH3Pf5dLKd/wctki9Ppd1Dd96iNrooVI0KSPtV3G8mbFWVOwjdzw9StUl0egu7RbEXpjspU+dkk/SW/wx0lXLb6Zc5mQnFTRQJab9Nx/tpyArs3wCTMyCyWWYyJ1r/rITewfjSoFv9Q= Original-Received: by 10.66.248.5 with SMTP id v5mr35318734ugh.1168387025643; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:57:05 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from chrislap.local ( [89.176.28.156]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 54sm41403311ugp.2007.01.09.15.57.04; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:57:05 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=chrislap.local) by chrislap.local with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H4Qpw-0004Ez-4G; Wed, 10 Jan 2007 00:57:02 +0100 Original-To: "Lennart Borgman \(gmail\)" In-Reply-To: <45A40F63.5070605@gmail.com> (Lennart Borgman's message of "Tue\, 09 Jan 2007 22\:55\:47 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dooglus@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:23:22 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on chrislap.local) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:65094 Archived-At: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" writes: > Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Who says that Microsoft libraries are more secure than the ones we >> use? There's no evidence that this is even remotely true. > Yes, who said that? You said that using the MS libraries would "enhance the security for the users", which sounds kind of similar. But maybe your point is that: the risk of using both MS image libraries and free software image libraries together is greater than the risk of using only MS image libraries