On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, matthew green wrote:

> i'm all for security features, but they can't break other things in
> the process.  why is it a regression to not enable a security feature
> for an emulation until it's verified _not to break it_?

Some people might prefer to have the emulation break, rather than the
security break. I would generally prefer that, since it's obvious
breakage, rather than subtle breakage.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson  <cjs@cynic.net>   +81 90 7737 2974   http://www.NetBSD.org
    Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light.  --XTC