From owner-freebsd-security Tue Jun 25 1:17: 4 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from a2.scoop.co.nz (aurora.scoop.co.nz [203.96.152.68]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B6E537B792 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 01:10:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a2.scoop.co.nz (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5P8AsrE070050; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:10:54 +1200 (NZST) (envelope-from andrew@scoop.co.nz) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:10:54 +1200 (NZST) From: Andrew McNaughton X-X-Sender: andrew@a2 To: "Matthew N. Dodd" Cc: Darren Reed , Subject: Re: Time to look put more resources into FreeSSH ? In-Reply-To: <20020625035702.F95270-100000@sasami.jurai.net> Message-ID: <20020625200524.O69343-100000@a2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, Matthew N. Dodd wrote: > On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, Darren Reed wrote: > > > What do others think about creating a little "bio-diversity" and > > moving from OpenSSH to FreeSSH at some point in the future as the > > "default" ssh installed ? > > If it moves the ssh utility out of the system so that the upgrade path is > via ports rather than build/install world then I'm for it. > > Having OpenSSH in the source tree doesn't buy us anything over having it > in ports and managing our local patches in the projects/ CVS hierarchy. I agree with this. I set NO_OPENSSH and NO_OPENSSL in my /etc/make.conf and use ports. Apart from being able to upgrade independently of the system, I like having the /usr/local/etc/rc.d scripts on hand. Why doesn't FreeBSD make these scripts exist in a stand alone form for things that get installed with the system? Is there a philosophy behind it, or is it just historical? Andrew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message