Re[2]: Estimated release of GnuPG 1.0.7?

DeBug debug <>
Mon Dec 17 15:57:02 2001

>> But isn't it possible to at least encourage people to use their own
>> compilers they're accustomed to, to at least help pinpoint porting bugs
>> in GnuPG ?
I think Olivier is right.

WK> Frankly, I don't want to get bothered with bugs due to different
WK> compilers, the Cygwin32 thing is troublesome enough.
I run Windows98SE just because i get used to it more than to KDE
I work with Borland's C++Builder just because i am very familiar with
its IDE (you know all the hints, warnings, tracing the code , step in ,
step over, help system, navigating code with bookmarks and Ctrl-hyperlinks etc etc )
and i like it since Turpo Pascal appeared.

WK> But what makes a Debian (or whatever) binary package more
WK> trustworth is that a lot of eyses have seen the source and that noone
WK> would risk the blame of deliberatley inserting a backdoor.  
Why then do not make even more eyes to see ?

WK> I am really tired of doing so.  Why should I spend my unpaid time on
WK> doing this instead of simply requiring the use of a POSIX system.
Here are two different things:
1) spending your valuable time
2) requiring the use of a POSIX
The first is up to you to decide but the second is questionable

Best regards,