Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:55:03 -0500 (EST) From: Andre Guibert de Bruet <andy@siliconlandmark.com> To: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Networked single-user recovery (Was: Re: Background fsck is broken) Message-ID: <20041216004526.N19917@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> In-Reply-To: <20041216001335.X19917@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> References: <44115.1103109518@critter.freebsd.dk> <20041215095337.T19917@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> <20041216001335.X19917@alpha.siliconlandmark.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
(Replying to myself) On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: > Dropbear appears to be put together from many pieces, all of which seem to > carry a BSD-compatible license (IANAL etc etc). It is currently in ports > (security/dropbear) and the built, stripped binary appear to "only" be 53K > smaller than the OpenSSH one. Because an sshd is a network daemon, security > is of course a concern -- Is the 53K of saved space in /rescue (But > additional space somewhere else for the convert and key utilities) worth the > hassles of tracking upstream distributions of two seperate sshds? I > personally tend to think not, but I'm open for comments on this one. Well, let me correct the size statement before someone else does. It would help if I actually compared the size of static versions of these files! It's late... Andy | Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant > | Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/ >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041216004526.N19917>