From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 9 14:15:06 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D5DE9F4 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 14:15:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dnebdal@gmail.com) Received: from mail-la0-x229.google.com (mail-la0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::229]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AB6DD50 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 14:15:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-la0-f41.google.com with SMTP id er20so1379905lab.28 for ; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 07:15:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=sS9sMMlCixXNxBv9O+d7QKI7VZWECIn46QdH5BLMq/c=; b=FP/lbKZis+7ht07QyGX9o016Nxi7sAf2WpIfJRjRHT64i/5OjyNVp9pA41u1cIAlcS sIZMdwXsJX7iKUBHKIB4CFWmz5SnEMDOHl4O6BaMIk579GdHoKENO++qg/KHEzXTbR9o bitFr/AwwuuLH2F7X0zFn7ZXX0O+sX2tzuhHkELB+UQHguM9PSX3MEDa3VxjYnf549dY JYRENX8tpmVYBP3sCjN3ZW4fZXKeYPyT9nq06oAPSk8jmJoPF1UxLvVM3xmeGlHqgYWI UmOkoue4wCatEQUfWI51idwOOE7HgPpdNCcrOUNokofPJcf7btm0LCq3EtA8uMR4SJb8 gfcg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.20.106 with SMTP id m10mr6113637lbe.8.1365516904396; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 07:15:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.198.168 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 07:15:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51641315.3080704@bluerosetech.com> References: <51622F44.3050604@FreeBSD.org> <1365441764.4112.1.camel@localhost> <51641315.3080704@bluerosetech.com> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 16:15:04 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Growing list of required(ish) ports From: Daniel Nebdal To: FreeBSD Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Florent Peterschmitt X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 14:15:06 -0000 On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote: > On 2013-04-08 10:22, Florent Peterschmitt wrote: >> >> Yep, OpenSSH is tiny enought to keep it in base system. It would be a >> big loss not to have it by default, securely installed in the base >> system. > > > I really wish it wasn't. Having OpenSSH (and thus OpenSSL) in the base > means FreeBSD has an outdated version installed by default. You have to > install openssl from ports in order to have modern cipher support, TLS > v1.1/1.2, DTLS, etc. This puts two sets of openssl libs on the system and > creates recurrent headaches with builds where the autoconfiguration selects > the wrong set of libs. > > I guess it would be possible to rename it to something autoconf misses, so ports have to use the ports-version? It enforces some redundancy, though I won't speculate on how much disk space it works out to. -- Daniel Nebdal