From owner-freebsd-security Sat Feb 10 14:32:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from green.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63E9F37B401; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:32:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (m6uhre@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by green.dyndns.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1A1jnr10637; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:45:50 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from green@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <200102100145.f1A1jnr10637@green.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Kris Kennaway Cc: Matt Dillon , Alfred Perlstein , green@FreeBSD.org, security@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: OpenSSH port patch In-Reply-To: Message from Kris Kennaway of "Fri, 09 Feb 2001 13:32:14 PST." <20010209133214.A65547@mollari.cthul.hu> From: "Brian F. Feldman" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 20:45:49 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 01:22:11PM -0800, Matt Dillon wrote: > > I think it's a whole lot better then simply marking the package > > forbidden! I was actually surprised that the package was marked > > forbidden, when the fix is only a few minutes of work. > > That presupposes I had a few minutes of spare time. I'll get to it > ASAP, if the maintainer doesn't first. I do not mind if someone else takes the OpenSSH port. I called it "end of life" and I really meant it because I simply don't want to do spend so much time keeping it up to date. It's much harder to do it in a port versus the src tree, especially. I don't mind if alfred or anyone else with a good reason modifies it. That said, I also no good reason not to just use sleep instead of nanosleep, as well. -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! / green@FreeBSD.org `------------------------------' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message