[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Release plans
From: |
Johannes Weiner |
Subject: |
Re: Release plans |
Date: |
Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:27:19 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden> writes:
>> And what is the difference between an Emacs that calls non-free code
>> via a binary module, and an Emacs that accesses files via TRAMP and
>> non-free SSH?
>
> The ability of a binary module to disable `defun' and prevent all but
> digitally signed code from being loaded.
How about fset'ing defun to something new?
You still have not answered to what I said yesterday: This
microsoft8.dll `functionality' does not in any way rely on the feature
proposed here.
And if you would want to do Bad Things, what prevents you from calling a
non-free binary with Emacs' process interface?
See, I really believe in your points that this feature has the potential
to be abused. But to me it is not obvious how it would open a _extra_
possibilities besides doing it more technically advanced.
The libotr bindings I have in mind would also work with the process
model. Just hack up an executable that can be controlled by
command-line arguments to wire up your elisp stuff with libotr.
But frankly, I only have seen such irksome solutions by people with low
motives and little technical interest. Look at how bad programs like
matlab are distributed: they dump themselves into /opt including all the
shared libaries they need while totally ignoring the rest of the system,
not giving a damn about standards.
So if I had other motives than technical cleverness and elegance, it
seems I would already be able to interact really close with non-free
software (not the ssh case but with an executable abstraction of a
non-free library!).
But I have no way right now to implement pluggable bindings in a sane
way that I would consider better than an ugly hack.
Hannes
- Re: Release plans, (continued)
- Re: Release plans, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/17
- Re: Release plans, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/08/18
- Re: Release plans, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/18
- Dynamic loading (was: Release plans), Stefan Monnier, 2008/08/18
- Dynamic loading (was: Release plans), Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/18
- Re: Dynamic loading, Stefan Monnier, 2008/08/20
- Re: Dynamic loading, joakim, 2008/08/20
- Re: Dynamic loading, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/25
- Re: Dynamic loading, Richard M. Stallman, 2008/08/26
- Re: Release plans, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/08/18
- Re: Release plans,
Johannes Weiner <=
- Re: Release plans, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/08/19
- Re: Release plans, Johannes Weiner, 2008/08/19
- Re: Release plans, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/19
- Re: Release plans, Robert J. Chassell, 2008/08/19
- Re: Release plans, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/20
- Re: Release plans, Robert J. Chassell, 2008/08/20
- Re: Release plans, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/24
- Re: Release plans, Robert J. Chassell, 2008/08/25
- Re: Release plans, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/08/25
- Re: Release plans, Robert J. Chassell, 2008/08/25