From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] gnu: Add acme-client. Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 14:50:28 -0400 Message-ID: <20160902185028.GB31756@jasmine> References: <57C9BE93.7090206@goebel-consult.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54858) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bftY4-0004PH-KW for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 14:50:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bftXz-00069K-N8 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 14:50:43 -0400 Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:35792) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bftXy-00068S-GD for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 14:50:39 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57C9BE93.7090206@goebel-consult.de> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Hartmut Goebel Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 08:01:55PM +0200, Hartmut Goebel wrote: > Am 02.09.2016 um 16:49 schrieb Leo Famulari: > > + (name "acme-client") > > I strongly suggest using a different name, as this is *one* of many > implementations and it is not the "official" one. Suggestions? > *shiver* Why would one implement this in an language like C, which is > prone to buffer overflows, if there are implementations available in > more secure languages? I wouldn't propose this package if it wasn't part of OpenBSD's base system: http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.sbin/acme-client/