Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 06:49:57 -0700 From: Fred Condo <fred@condo.chico.ca.us> To: "Andrew P. Lentvorski" <bsder@mail.allcaps.org> Cc: Mike Jakubik <mikej@trigger.net>, Stable <stable@FreeBSD.ORG>, dinoex@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sshd vs ports sshd Message-ID: <20020711134957.GC72613@absinthe.condo.chico.ca.us> In-Reply-To: <20020711012016.X71272-100000@mail.allcaps.org> References: <20020710143306.GC70071@absinthe.condo.chico.ca.us> <20020711012016.X71272-100000@mail.allcaps.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:50:32AM -0700, Andrew P. Lentvorski wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Fred Condo wrote: > > > I strenuously disagree. Should inetd be a port? Sendmail? What about > > syslogd or named? Although not all should be on by default, they are > > certainly essential to enough users that they should be part of the > > default installation. > > Well, since you brought it up, the idea should certainly be open to > discussion ;) Yes, but perhaps no more on -stable. There is no way the arguably reasonable changes you propose below will go into stable, so this discussion is veering off-topic, and I would hate to be the guy responsible for reducing s/n here. > > I can make the case for removing any subsystem which is primarily > maintained by someone other than the FreeBSD team from the "base" system > (ie. buildworld/installworld). This would include named/bind (which most > people don't use), sendmail (lots of people use other mailers), OpenSSH > (security fixes propagate more often than OS releases), Perl (way too big > and unstable), etc. > > The latest OpenSSH fire drill certainly helps make the point. If OpenSSH > wasn't a part of the base buildworld, the dev team wouldn't have to worry > about it right now. It would be completely a ports issue. > > Please note that you can make packages part of a default install even if > it's not going to be part of the main buildworld. See the rather long > flamefest^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hdiscussion about removing Perl from the base > distribution. Very few people would argue that Perl shouldn't be part of > a "default" install. However, keeping it as part of a > buildworld/installworld base just becomes very unwieldy. The compromise > is to install it by default as a package. Yes, let us not start a "discussion" like the one about Perl here. This discussion should move to another list. I don't think this change should (or will) happen on RELENG_4, so it is moot to post here about it, and I will post no more in this thread forever :) -- Fred Condo - fred@condo.chico.ca.us To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020711134957.GC72613>