That doesn't make sense. Seeing it from home should be cheaper, since they don't need a huge cinema, lots of personel, cleaning people, rent, etc, etc. They just deal with server costs which a way lower.

Cinemas cost less in different parts of the world. Maybe in the US a cinema costs $5, but not everywhere. Heck, even an Imax is around $5 where I live, and Imax is the most expensive one around.

This movie costs $5 even in places where that's more than twice the daily salary.

$5 to watch a movie a single time!? Sounds like a huge ripoff. The most expensive cinemas in town cost less than that. The cheap ones cost about a fifth. And I only get to "rent" it, I can't even watch it again later, or with friends, etc.

I'm sorry, but I'm just sticking to thepiratebay until you fix your business model.

Freedns has been around for ages, and doesn't seem to be going anywhere. They include DDNS for free as well.

Came here to say exactly that. Unless it's done in hardware (which would be EXTREMELY complicated), OpenWRT can do away with that. Plus, you get all the extra free features, and, with luci, a DECENT http interface (contrary to what most routers include).

Sounds like what they're trying to fix is scenarios where the server SHOULD be returning 410, not 404. This has nothing to do with PROPER 404 status codes.

Anyway, is something is so important mirror it yourself and be done with it. No need for html tags. BTW, it seems to blur the line between HTML and HTTP too much.

Troll? He's a comedian, and a pretty good one!

And their logistics. I'm still wondering how they solved the "we need to distribute this magazine to people all around the world at acceptable costs" as well.

Because of how OpenBSD's allocator works, the "reading past the allocated space" code would trigger page faults on OpenBSD (not always, but some times). These are fatal, and make the program crash.

One of the messages on the thread linked in TFS mentions how this works in greater detail.

If they hadn't used their own allocator, then this bug would have been exposed on OpenBSD ages ago since it would lead to OpenSSL crashing over and over again. At first you migth think that this only helps OpenBSD users, but no: this would have led to research on the matter (the crashed), and the issue being found quite soon after it was introduced.

So it would not have been benefitial only to OpenBSD, but to everyone.

Looking at the diffs in tech@, is seems they're dropping DOS, WIN16 and WIN32. I've no idea if there was any WIN64 specific code, but yes, it seem's windows in general is being stripped.

Dropping support for these platforms means getting rid of a lot of files/code/ifs/etc. Less code is easier to review. Better reviewed code has more chances of bugs being caught in time.

You say you're a new Linux user, and it looks like you're carrying over you windows-way-of-thinking.

Most Linux distros don't have services running with lots of security holes. You don't generally need this.
Most malware out there is actually stuff like "click here for free money.exe". Even if you come across Ubuntu-targeted stuff, it does look like you're the kind of person who wouldn't click that.

Several people here have pointed out possible solutions, but think for a moment if you really need them.

Did you read the entire email? Several of the issues he's mentioning here are not mere "errors". Skiping exploit mitigations for the sake of performance (on some platforms!) on a security library/program isn't an error, it's awfully irresponsable!

That's a pretty generic response and applies to absolutely every piece of software in existance.
It's a good think OpenSSH doesn't use any version of OpenSSL though.

It doesn't really matter which OS they pick, they still need to pay somebody for support (in the sense of fixing installs, etc. Updates will be provided from upstream).