From owner-freebsd-current Mon Mar 6 13: 4: 3 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from salmon.maths.tcd.ie (salmon.maths.tcd.ie [134.226.81.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B4EBA37BEFE; Mon, 6 Mar 2000 13:03:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie) Received: from walton.maths.tcd.ie by salmon.maths.tcd.ie with SMTP id ; 6 Mar 2000 21:03:50 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 21:03:50 +0000 From: David Malone To: Warner Losh Cc: Kris Kennaway , bloom@acm.org, John Baldwin , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Message-ID: <20000306210349.A73029@walton.maths.tcd.ie> References: <200003062032.NAA61484@harmony.village.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <200003062032.NAA61484@harmony.village.org>; from imp@village.org on Mon, Mar 06, 2000 at 01:32:00PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Mar 06, 2000 at 01:32:00PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > : > + Openssh isn't 100% compatible with ssh, so some care needs to > : > + be taken in its operation. > : > : This sounds bad. Are you referring to the -o syntax differences, or actual > : incompatabilities? There have been unsubstantiated reports of > : interoperability problems, but nothing well documented here. > > I'm talking about the -o syntax difference specifically. How does the > following sound? [SNIP] > + Openssh's command line parsing isn't 100% compatible with ssh, > + so some care needs to be taken in its operation. I'd leave it saying that it isn't 100% compatible - it may sound bad but it's true. There are several other things that aren't the same: default options are different, some options have been removed (AllowHosts is one that I know of), it produces warning messages where the old ssh wouldn't have. I'm sure there are other differences too. David. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message