Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 14:09:29 -0700 From: Ben Schumacher <ben@mho.com> To: small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: a question Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20001222140028.00affdc0@pop3.mho.com> In-Reply-To: <200012220426.eBM4Qbv63773@iguana.aciri.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 08:26 PM 12/21/2000 -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote: >I have been thinking a bit on the best approach, and it seems >that a feasible one would be to have a specialized port e.g. >ports/security/ssh-picobsd with the picobsd-specific patches. > >As a matter of fact, it might be reasonable to have a >ports/picobsd category where one would put this kind of >things -- e.g. "small" versions of applications which are >in the source tree or in the ports. > >Opinions ? Honestly, I think this sounds like a great idea. I've been struggling for sometime to figure out a way to get ssh small enough to easily fit into a picobsd image I've been working on to no avail. I hadn't actually thought (silly me) of checking out the port vs. the OpenSSH version, but if it really is as small as you say it is, it perfect for me. And modifying a version of it to be even more tweaked/smaller sounds like a great idea. I'm sure there are a number of ports that would benefit from that kind of attention. I haven't really looked at the code for the ssh port, but I would certainly be willing to participate in this project in anyway I could. - Ben To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5.0.2.1.2.20001222140028.00affdc0>