Date: 28 Jun 2002 10:39:35 +0200 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: Arvinn =?iso-8859-1?q?L=F8kkebakken?= <arvinn@rns.no> Cc: "JP Villa (Datafull.com)" <root@datafull.com>, <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Re[2]: openssh OR openssh-portable Message-ID: <xzphejnu794.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> 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> <002501c21e38$1be59db0$0201a8c0@dus>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Arvinn L=F8kkebakken <arvinn@rns.no> writes: > I still don't understand the difference. According to the OpenSSH's websi= te > the portable version is for other operating systems (than OpenBSD i assum= e). > Why is it then possible to use the "not portable" version of OpenSSH on > FreeBSD? Because FreeBSD and OpenBSD aren't really all that different. > By reading this I understand that the p release (openssh-portable) is not= as > clean as the other one. What are the benefits running the p release on > FreeBSD systems when both releases works? OpenSSH-portable has better support for some things (like PAM and Kerberos V) that FreeBSD has but OpenBSD doesn't. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org 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?xzphejnu794.fsf>