From owner-freebsd-stable Wed Jul 10 15:17:49 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE9637B400 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:17:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mserver2.gmu.edu (mail02.gmu.edu [129.174.0.112]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C99043E52 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:17:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sbernard@gmu.edu) Received: from CERBERUS ([129.174.39.210]) by mserver2.gmu.edu (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id GZ20LF00.POI for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 18:17:39 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Steve Bernard" To: Subject: RE: sshd vs ports sshd Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 18:17:30 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <3D2CAE81.6010706@forsetti.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG And presumably you could edit a simple config file to customize a local distribution so that it conforms to what you might feel represents a "functional" or "minimal" base for your environment. Sounds reasonable. Steve -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG [mailto:owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Matt Smith Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 6:01 PM To: Helge Oldach Cc: Mike Jakubik; fred@condo.chico.ca.us; stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sshd vs ports sshd Perhaps there are better ways, but here is a "simple" solution to the issue of "apps in the base system" vs. "apps from ports": Install these apps (ssh, sendmail, etc) in the base system as packages. In other words, a basic install would still install these components, but they would be installed in /usr/local/, and would be registered with the pkg db, so they can easily be removed, maintained, upgraded, etc. Also, this may allow for 2 new installation options: "Functional Base" and "Minimal Base", with the only difference being the inclusion of a default set of packages in the "Functional Base". Just my $0.02, -Matt Helge Oldach wrote: > Mike Jakubik: > >>In no way am I saying that curtail services like syslogd or inetd should be >>taken out. But things like openssh, sendmail, certain libs, and basically >>most software that is available and up to date via the ports. > > > No, it shouldn't. I want a full-function system with a decent MTA, a > decent secure login facility, a decent time synchronization facility, a > decent nameserver, and so on. I *don't* want a base system that isn't > good for anything but eating CPU. > > This is not a question of getting the base system "pure" and to adhere > minimalization efforts with a slightly religious attitude, but to have > a base system that people can do something useful with. (Yes, I have > several servers that don't have a single port installed because the base > system just provides all I need.) > > Note that I don't care too much about *which* basic server software is > included in the base system, however I admit that I have chosen FreeBSD > for the reason that it has all the well-known stuff of sendmail, ssh, > xntp and bind on board. > > Helge > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message