Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 04:47:54 +0200 From: Cyrille Lefevre <cyrille.lefevre@laposte.net> To: Jay Sachs <jay@eziba.com> Cc: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org>, stan <stanb@awod.com>, FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org>, des@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ssh to remote machines problem after cvsup Message-ID: <20020713024753.GH2527@gits.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <3D2B270B.2050201@eziba.com> References: <20020708152519.O84324-100000@zoot.corp.yahoo.com> <3D2A2A60.4090807@eziba.com> <3D2B18C9.B266193A@FreeBSD.org> <3D2B270B.2050201@eziba.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 02:10:19PM -0400, Jay Sachs wrote: > Doug Barton wrote: > > Jay Sachs wrote: > > > There are those of us who consider the protocol switch a good change, > > So you are free to do that on your systems. The problem is, whether you > > think it's a good idea or not, it's already catching people by surprise, > > and locking them out of their systems. The change should be reverted. > > It just seems that changes are being made in response to vocal users who > read neither UPDATING nor the headsup to the -stable list. > Unfortunately, when changes feel "right" to people, it's typical > to remain silent; hence I voiced my preference, being a -stable tracker > but non-committer. the problem here isn't the Protocol switch which is valiable. it is the OpenSSH bug which fail to fallback from v2 to v1 when not available. so, Doug is right and I'm w/ him when he though that shouldn't happen until this `feature' isn't fixed and arguing than UPDATING is the solution is too simple. this commit break some installation in a way it shouldn't. point. Cyrille. -- Cyrille Lefevre mailto:cyrille.lefevre@laposte.net 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?20020713024753.GH2527>