Le mardi 09 avril 2013 à 06:09 -0700, Darren Pilgrim a écrit : > On 2013-04-08 10:22, Florent Peterschmitt wrote: > > Yep, OpenSSH is tiny enought to keep it in base system. It would be a > > big loss not to have it by default, securely installed in the base > > system. > > I really wish it wasn't. Having OpenSSH (and thus OpenSSL) in the base > means FreeBSD has an outdated version installed by default. You have to > install openssl from ports in order to have modern cipher support, TLS > v1.1/1.2, DTLS, etc. This puts two sets of openssl libs on the system > and creates recurrent headaches with builds where the autoconfiguration > selects the wrong set of libs.
Hum, I didn't thought about that. So I think it would be possible to have a secondary « branch » for the distribution including something like « special ports » which can be retrieved, built and managed (for porters) quickly. Anybody think something like that is relevant and possible to do ? -- Florent Peterschmitt +33 (0)6 64 33 97 92 flor...@peterschmitt.fr
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
