Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 11:01:44 +0000 From: Josef Karthauser <joe@tao.org.uk> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@aciri.org> Cc: small@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: a question Message-ID: <20001222110144.A498@tao.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <200012220426.eBM4Qbv63773@iguana.aciri.org>; from rizzo@aciri.org on Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 08:26:37PM -0800 References: <200012220426.eBM4Qbv63773@iguana.aciri.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 08:26:37PM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > Hi, > > i have a question related to a picobsd port. > > For building picobsd images with ssh+sshd+scp, the only way which > seems feasible is to use a modified version of the ssh1 port > (mods are done in order to build a crunched binary which in turn > is crunched again together with the other picobsd apps). > > 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. > > As a matter of fact, it might be reasonable to have a > ports/picobsd category where one would put this kind of > things -- e.g. "small" versions of applications which are > in the source tree or in the ports. > > Opinions ? > > cheers > luigi > > P.S. for the curious: ssh+sshd+scp crunched together take 190KB > uncompressed, versus the over 500KB for openssh and friends using > the same method. Another example of a 'fat' app is tcpdump, which > (compressed) grew from ~48KB to ~100KB between 3.4 and 4.2 On the other hand is there anyone who knows openssh who would be willing to help make it smaller? It seems to me to be better to use code that's already in the tree if possible. Joe 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?20001222110144.A498>