On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, David Malone wrote: > I'd leave it saying that it isn't 100% compatible - it may sound > bad but it's true. There are several other things that aren't the > same: default options are different, some options have been removed > (AllowHosts is one that I know of), it produces warning messages > where the old ssh wouldn't have. I'm sure there are other differences > too. None of these affect the operation of OpenSSH in your network. Sure, you have to check the config files when you migrate to it, but the point is it's not incompatible with other SSH implementations, and we don't want to scare people into thinking it has weird lurking bugs and they'd better not use it. Kris ---- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Garance A Drosihn
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Warner Losh
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... John Baldwin
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Jim Bloom
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Warner Losh
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Jim Bloom
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Kris Kennaway
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Warner Losh
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... David Malone
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Bruce A. Mah
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Kris Kennaway
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Kris Kennaway
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Sheldon Hearn
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Udo Erdelhoff
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Christian Weisgerber
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Warner Losh
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Kris Kennaway
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Harold Gutch
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Daniel C. Sobral
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Warner Losh
- Re: ssh strangeness in -current... Ollivier Robert