Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 08:36:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG> To: "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net> Cc: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au>, security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Time to look put more resources into FreeSSH ? Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020625083430.43916U-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20020625035702.F95270-100000@sasami.jurai.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, Matthew N. Dodd wrote: > On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, Darren Reed wrote: > > I think the subject raises the question well enough. > > > > What do others think about creating a little "bio-diversity" and > > moving from OpenSSH to FreeSSH at some point in the future as the > > "default" ssh installed ? > > If it moves the ssh utility out of the system so that the upgrade path > is via ports rather than build/install world then I'm for it. > > Having OpenSSH in the source tree doesn't buy us anything over having it > in ports and managing our local patches in the projects/ CVS hierarchy. > > I see no problem with having a set of 'default packages' installed by > sysinstall. In the past, the OpenBSD OpenSSH has required hire levels of modification to run in our environment in a manner consistent with other remote access services. This has been the case because of things like PAM support. It could be that with a move to OpenSSH-portable, there's an improved ability to merge non-OpenBSD-relevant changes back to the vendor (in fact, I'd imagine that would very much be the case). This will let us re-visit the base tree issue if we choose to once that result is clear. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Network Associates Laboratories To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020625083430.43916U-100000>