Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Ben de Groot <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:yngwin@g.o" target="_blank">yngwin@g.o</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On 15 June 2012 12:45, Arun Raghavan <<a href="mailto:ford_prefect@g.o">ford_prefect@g.o</a>> wrote:<br>
> On 15 June 2012 09:58, Greg KH <<a href="mailto:gregkh@g.o">gregkh@g.o</a>> wrote:<br>
>> So, anyone been thinking about this? I have, and it's not pretty.<br>
>><br>
</div><div class="im">>> Minor details like, "do we have a 'company' that can pay Microsoft to<br>
>> sign our bootloader?" is one aspect from the non-technical side that I've<br>
>> been wondering about.<br>
><br>
> Sounds like something the Gentoo Foundation could do.<br>
<br>
</div>I'm certainly not the only one who would be averse to paying Microsoft<br>
any ransom money.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Last I heard Verisign was handling the signing certs, but that also doesn't mean MS isn't getting a cut of the profit. </div><div></div></div><br>
<div><br></div><div>- Matt</div>
|
|
