On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 14:04 -0500, Ben Walton wrote:
> > Good to know. Thanks for curating it nicely! I understand the > time/effort it takes[1] and I hope you didn't take my comments as > negative criticism...I hadn't looked at Debian's package at all. I > was only trying to express that I felt the patches were useful and if > not slipped in upstream, at least the 'vendors' could include them. > Beware of vendor patches that upstreams do not incorporate! We all remember the screwup debian caused a great deal of the internet with its SSL mess a few years ago, that not only affected debian servers, but all servers using certificates generated on a debian machine, and not to be biased, RedHat has made some messes before as well, tis why we no longer use either of their distro's nor their slightly flavoured different cousins. I wont say which Linux we only use to avoid OS wars :) Just remember, if an upstream does not use an offered patch, there is likely a very, VERY, good reason.
<<attachment: face-smile.png>>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
_______________________________________________ rssh-discuss mailing list rssh-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rssh-discuss
