On 06/29/2011 09:50 AM, Anders Darander wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 10:24, Koen Kooi <[email protected]> wrote: >> Op 29 jun 2011, om 00:41 heeft Khem Raj het volgende geschreven: >>> If they are independent then may be the openssh recipe should be >>> divided into openssh-ssh and openssh-rest so one can use openssh >>> provided daemon or dropbear provided as they wish >> Dividing the openssl recipe would gain us little and the gains would be only >> for the power companies since you'd have to build openssh twice to get both >> sftp and ssh. The decrease in build time for only sftp is neglible. > Hm, speaking against what I've often been advocating (reducing build > time by factoring out dependenies etc)... > > I think the simplest and most straightforward solution is to just > split the packaging into > openssh-ssh and openssh-sftp, where openssh-sftp packages just what is > needed for handling > the sftp-server in cooperation with dropbear. It could possibly also > include the sftp-client if > desired/needed. > > The openssh-ssh package could then depend on the openssh-sftp package; > then there would > be no difference today for the distros using the complete openssh package. > > I read the >>> If they are independent then may be the openssh recipe should be >>> divided into openssh-ssh and openssh-rest > part as just splitting the package. But now when I re-read it, it could very > well have implied creating two recipes; which I agree wouldn't be the best > option. > The package in OE has been split for a long long time since I first discovered about dropbear being about to use sftp-server.
Graeme _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
