in reply to Re^4: Getting Fed Up with ActiveState
in thread Getting Fed Up with ActiveState

That's ridiculous. Disassemble shared libraries?

It would be, had that been what I suggested, but I did not. But that you bring it up as a strawman to knock down signposts your intent.

Ensuring the integrity of your systems by static inspection of code is impossible, even for only moderately complex software.

The correct way to test software is by running it and observing it's behaviour. Eg. In a sandox environment. Anything less is make-work for a false sense of security.

you suggested that anybody should be able to upload PPMs for any modules.

Where?

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Getting Fed Up with ActiveState
by tsee (Curate) on Dec 03, 2006 at 22:02 UTC
    Where?

    I'm sorry. You didn't suggest that anybody should be able to upload PPMs for any modules. I read through the whole thread including Limbic Region's post which is quoted below and several of your posts. I mixed them up. I was confident that you wrote that. I should have double-checked. Sorry.

    Limbic Region wrote:

    If the author didn't develop on Win32 there should still be a mechanism to allow someone else to provide the binary distribution.

    Steffen

[reply]

In Section Meditations