On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 09:13, Mike Bo wrote: > Darren wrote: > > Why not ? Why can't OpenSolaris just be as quick as OpenBSD ? > > When there is a problem with OpenSSH, does the Sun team investigate whether > it affects their forked code base? If so, don't they have to port the fix and > then do regression testing? Doesn't this take time?
Yes we most certainly do, yes we do but then so does RedHat and everyone else that ships binaries as well. We start this work as soon as we get notification of the problem. Usually we get the same notification as OpenSSH. Note that we do NOT wait for them to produce the patch and then integrate it we will develop our own and then resync if the change is different and only then if their fix is better than ours. > No, I'm not an SSH developer. But UNIX admins are often in a position to > decide which SSH implementation to use. It might be interesting to read a > "how to" document that illustrates the SunSSH enhanced functionality with > practical examples. But until the real benefits outweigh a perceived risk, I > will continue to replace SunSSH with OpenSSH. The spec basically says it is required. If you don't have it interop doesn't work well because you need to have something to key off the bugs in the peer implementation. Why is it that knowing that it is OpenSSH at a specific version and patch level is okay but knowing that it is Sun's specific version and patch level is not ? -- Darren J Moffat _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
