Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 16:15:04 +0200 From: Daniel Nebdal <dnebdal@gmail.com> To: FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Cc: Florent Peterschmitt <florent@peterschmitt.fr> Subject: Re: Growing list of required(ish) ports Message-ID: <CA%2Bt49PJ4CMOd6t2hULauPadmHWZE=Nh0mTnMbaSooOUmoka3Mw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51641315.3080704@bluerosetech.com> References: <CA%2BQLa9Af3CC=FKMkrnmSL_-frW7ZvCQJ3=q7xkHUz5-3YyE3fQ@mail.gmail.com> <51622F44.3050604@FreeBSD.org> <CA%2BQLa9C5pfcRWrLXEiKzZEvVYd5W=wbN9i5wjtp=m92Fn8oq5w@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2B7WWSfwGBfXRcmc0UJ2ebguq5%2B-pYY82eopicpPcgeKxUCj3A@mail.gmail.com> <CAN6yY1ttmkiV_ns1qfhjd8ROiZ8WfUfmaj%2Ba1N6Ezapj3-QNcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOjFWZ6EMjsBLHde-x7ZAx1qPmCB%2BvOSyCt-WWkmxtYfJsCJQw@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2Bt49PLz4-kg-=umrPm5Aad6Wjj=Ud=n=js39EJ-dEzJ60MmrQ@mail.gmail.com> <1365441764.4112.1.camel@localhost> <51641315.3080704@bluerosetech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Darren Pilgrim <list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com> wrote: > On 2013-04-08 10:22, Florent Peterschmitt wrote: >> >> Yep, OpenSSH is tiny enought to keep it in base system. It would be a >> big loss not to have it by default, securely installed in the base >> system. > > > I really wish it wasn't. Having OpenSSH (and thus OpenSSL) in the base > means FreeBSD has an outdated version installed by default. You have to > install openssl from ports in order to have modern cipher support, TLS > v1.1/1.2, DTLS, etc. This puts two sets of openssl libs on the system and > creates recurrent headaches with builds where the autoconfiguration selects > the wrong set of libs. > > I guess it would be possible to rename it to something autoconf misses, so ports have to use the ports-version? It enforces some redundancy, though I won't speculate on how much disk space it works out to. -- Daniel Nebdal
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2Bt49PJ4CMOd6t2hULauPadmHWZE=Nh0mTnMbaSooOUmoka3Mw>