Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 19:09:05 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Arvinn Løkkebakken <arvinn@rns.no>, "JP Villa (Datafull.com)" <root@datafull.com>, "Dag-Erling Smorgrav" <des@ofug.org> Cc: <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Re[2]: openssh OR openssh-portable Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20020627190406.024a04f0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <002501c21e38$1be59db0$0201a8c0@dus> References: <3D1AD7C4.9020909@cerint.pl> <xzp6604x5ue.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <41256714305.20020627163946@datafull.com> <xzpbs9wv172.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 06:09 PM 6/27/2002, Arvinn Løkkebakken wrote: >"Managing the distribution of OpenSSH is split into two teams. One team does >strictly OpenBSD-based development, aiming to produce code that is as clean, >simple, and secure as possible. The other team takes the clean version and >makes it portable, so that it will run on many operating systems (these are >known as the p releases, and named like "OpenSSH 3.3p1"). Please click on >the provided link for your operating system." > >By reading this I understand that the p release (openssh-portable) is not as >clean Unfortunately, the definition of "clean" here seems to really mean "OpenBSD-specific and non-portable." I don't agree with this definition. As a rule, portable code is usually better tested and therefore "cleaner" in that sense. The only thing which is really "unclean" about the portable version is licensing: it uses GNU configure. I really wish it didn't. At least the OpenSSH code itself is truly free. --Brett 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?4.3.2.7.2.20020627190406.024a04f0>