From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mark H Weaver Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#13768: --without-posix code uses scm_getpid() in libguile-2.0.2 Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:58:27 -0500 Message-ID: <87bob85igc.fsf@tines.lan> References: <51240CE7.8030802@email.de> <87ip5hcyb1.fsf@pobox.com> <87sj4l5gzo.fsf@tines.lan> <87621g92zl.fsf@pobox.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1361818766 7154 80.91.229.3 (25 Feb 2013 18:59:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 18:59:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 13768-done@debbugs.gnu.org, shookie@email.de To: Andy Wingo Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 25 19:59:48 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UA3HA-0005UY-2H for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:59:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42881 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UA3Gp-0002Pv-F5 for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:59:27 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:36689) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UA3Gl-0002P0-IX for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:59:25 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UA3Gj-0003XW-Mc for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:59:23 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:44436) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UA3Gj-0003XN-GL for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:59:21 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UA3IL-0000Vw-O5 for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:01:01 -0500 Resent-From: Mark H Weaver Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:01:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 13768 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Mail-Followup-To: 13768@debbugs.gnu.org, mhw@netris.org, shookie@email.de Original-Received: via spool by 13768-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D13768.13618188351940 (code D ref 13768); Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:01:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13768-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Feb 2013 19:00:35 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49900 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UA3Hv-0000VF-B4 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:00:35 -0500 Original-Received: from world.peace.net ([96.39.62.75]:58424) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UA3Hr-0000V6-RN for 13768-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:00:33 -0500 Original-Received: from 209-6-91-212.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com ([209.6.91.212] helo=tines.lan) by world.peace.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UA3G5-0000HB-S0; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:58:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87621g92zl.fsf@pobox.com> (Andy Wingo's message of "Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:06:38 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:6791 Archived-At: Hi Andy, Andy Wingo writes: > Our PRNG is not secure. We should not be making arguments from the > perspective of security. (I think including the PID is a good thing, > but not because of security.) Indeed, point well taken. > Why don't we just add the result of getpid() without relying on the > scm_getpid() binding. All platforms have it. Ah, good! I didn't know that getpid() was available on MinGW. > Thanks for following up. TBH though I would prefer that if you already > know the solution, to go ahead and fix it instead of writing a mail and > fixing the docs. Agreed. I didn't know the solution until just now. I have done as you suggested above, and am now closing this bug. Thanks, Mark