1 |
On Wednesday 17 September 2003 03:32, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
2 |
> with all this openssh crap thats been happening today, i was wondering if |
3 |
> anyone made ebuilds for lsh (and thus liboop) for Gentoo ... i was looking |
4 |
> at liboop and they use the autotools pretty poorly imho ... |
5 |
|
6 |
Well there are ebuilds in bugzilla but carpaski set them to fixed without |
7 |
bothering to add them to the official portage tree as noone seemed to be |
8 |
interested in those ebuilds. Maybe you have better luck this time. Tell us |
9 |
about the bug report here so we can all post, so it gets in this time :) |
10 |
|
11 |
> i made a few patches so as to make those aspects optional, but i cant get |
12 |
> the autotools to regenerate the Makefile.in and configure files correctly |
13 |
|
14 |
Well if you figure it out, send the patches to the maintainers, they probably |
15 |
just didn't add such things as nobody complained and they don't see a need |
16 |
for that. Was the same with a DESTDIR variable in chrony until I wanted to |
17 |
make an ebuild. Richard was quite pleased with the patch once he saw the need |
18 |
for that. |
19 |
|
20 |
Also if you read the man pages or some other sources and see the "*this stuff |
21 |
is insecure*" notices, they are all from 98 or 99. Nothing like that for the |
22 |
newer releases (well the man pages still contain it but they were not updated |
23 |
since 99) although I of course don't have the expertise to check myself if |
24 |
lsh is secure. But you might find it interesting that some people from the |
25 |
de.alt.sysadmin.recovery newsgroup will probably review the lsh codebase to |
26 |
their best knowledge. Naturally they want to get rid of openssh now :) |
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
Alex |
30 |
|
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |