Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:36:23 -0500 (CDT) From: David Scheidt <dscheidt@enteract.com> To: Jay Nelson <jdn@acp.qiv.com> Cc: "f.johan.beisser" <jan@caustic.org>, Greg Lewis <glewis@trc.adelaide.edu.au>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeSSH Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96.991014003212.52479A-100000@shell-1.enteract.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9910131936430.1251-100000@acp.qiv.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Jay Nelson wrote: > > >> In the interests of minimising bloat we could balance its inclusion by > >> deleting something like, say, uucp. > >> (:-) for the uucps users) > > > >actually, i don't think this is a good idea. there are still a few (very > >few.. i hope) networks and LAN's that use UUCP for mail transfer and such. Why are you hoping for very few users of UUCP? It works quite well, and is very low maintance. People who have intermittant connectivity have good reason to still use it. I use it in a couple instances over FTP, because it has spooling and logging facilities built in. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96.991014003212.52479A-100000>