Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 08:31:56 +0200 From: Alexander Prohorenko <white@extra.dp.ua> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@aciri.org> Cc: Ben Schumacher <ben@mho.com>, small@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ssh for picobsd (was Re: a question) Message-ID: <20001223083156.A23723@extra.dp.ua> In-Reply-To: <200012230121.eBN1LvC80509@iguana.aciri.org>; from rizzo@aciri.org on Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 05:21:57PM -0800 References: <5.0.2.1.2.20001222140028.00affdc0@pop3.mho.com> <200012230121.eBN1LvC80509@iguana.aciri.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 05:21:57PM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > > >I have been thinking a bit on the best approach, and it seems > > >that a feasible one would be to have a specialized port e.g. > > >ports/security/ssh-picobsd with the picobsd-specific patches. [] > ok, i have put the "port" for ssh1 (both for 3.4 and 4.2) at > http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/picobsd/ > This (and yesterday's commits to remove the loader, and some tcpdump > patches) let me build a system on 4.2 which has ssh,sshd,scp, natd, > ppp (same on 3.4R -- actually there i think there is even room for > a splash screen :) Well, first of all, this sounds great. But for the second - which ssh are you using? Is it OpenSSH or ssh software from ssh.com? The license from ssh.com does not allow us to use its software in commercial purposes, as far as I remember. > I am a bit hesitant to commmit this as a port, because i got no > feedback at all from the ports guys -- but maybe today everybody > has gone shopping, and i better go too! As far as my opinion it concerns, I think that idea of keeping special ports of "tiny" versions of some software is great. -- Alexander Prohorenko, Extra Solutions http://extra.com.ua "Good day to be alive, sir" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001223083156.A23723>