Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2006-11-13 05:27, Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 2006-Nov-12 12:14:31 +0100, Marc Fonvieille wrote:
SSH is the protocol, and ssh is the application/program (so
<application></application> or <command></command> according to the
situation).
To be pedantic, the application is OpenSSH.
Well, right now, yes. But it is "a member of the family of applications
which implement the `SSH' protocol". I am not saying that this can
actually happen real soon now, but if OpenSSH doesn't work the way we
want it to work, it is possible that our <application>SSH</application>
in a few years will be <application>FooSSH</application>.
When the 'Open' part of 'OpenSSH' is important, it is obligatory that
we mention and make it stand out (if not for any other reason, as a form
of our appreciation for the work of the OpenSSH folks). But when we
talk about the 'SSH' protocol in general, do we really have to do so?
- Giorgos
This chapter, as far as I can tell, talks about SSH in general, as
Giorgos stated. There is another chapter talking about OpenSSH in
particular, and in that chapter OpenSSH is used when talking about the
application.
//Niclas
_______________________________________________
cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
