Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 13:53:49 -0400 From: Bryan Fullerton <bryanf@samurai.com> To: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com> Cc: security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SSH2 (in FreeBSD-Questions) Message-ID: <19990604135349.C1032@samurai.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.990604081850.5931F-100000@roble2.roble.com>; from Roger Marquis on Fri, Jun 04, 1999 at 08:19:08AM -0700 References: <Pine.GSO.3.96.990604081850.5931F-100000@roble2.roble.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 04, 1999 at 08:19:08AM -0700, Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com> wrote: > >The problem is that we never now what SUID, port will install! > > Not only "what SUID" but "where" as well. Ports may be one the best > things about FreeBSD but there's still _plenty_ of room for > improvement. > > One thing ports don't do well is install themselves in predictable > locations. Instead you'll find them installing files in > /usr/local/etc, /usr/local/bin, /usr/local/sbin, /usr/local/libexec, > /var, etc. When I install ssh2 I want it all under /usr/local/ssh. > This alone is a good reason to use ports sparingly (after reviewing the > patches). Agreed, though I don't mind ssh being dropped in /usr/local/bin and /usr/local/sbin, since that's where the non-port install drops them. I do prefer the config stuff to be put in /etc/ssh2 instead of /usr/local/etc/ssh2, though - I'm not sure if this is a compile time option or not (I'll admit, I haven't checked - it's not *that* big a deal for me). However, both ssh ports are a version behind, and that version was released on May 13th. Is there an update in the pipe somewhere? Bryan -- Bryan Fullerton http://www.samurai.com/ Core Competency Samurai Consulting "No, we don't do seppuku." Can you feel the Ohmu call? 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?19990604135349.C1032>