From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27210 invoked by uid 1002); 17 Sep 2003 17:05:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 18317 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2003 17:05:23 -0000 From: Alexander Gretencord To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 19:05:21 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 References: <200309162132.01170.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200309162132.01170.vapier@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200309171905.22047.arutha@gmx.de> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] lsh (and liboop) on Gentoo X-Archives-Salt: c2e56137-e493-421f-88df-7ac4958288c1 X-Archives-Hash: 32703b1d333d9b33ef281dfd96b4a1fd On Wednesday 17 September 2003 03:32, Mike Frysinger wrote: > with all this openssh crap thats been happening today, i was wondering if > anyone made ebuilds for lsh (and thus liboop) for Gentoo ... i was looking > at liboop and they use the autotools pretty poorly imho ... Well there are ebuilds in bugzilla but carpaski set them to fixed without bothering to add them to the official portage tree as noone seemed to be interested in those ebuilds. Maybe you have better luck this time. Tell us about the bug report here so we can all post, so it gets in this time :) > i made a few patches so as to make those aspects optional, but i cant get > the autotools to regenerate the Makefile.in and configure files correctly Well if you figure it out, send the patches to the maintainers, they probably just didn't add such things as nobody complained and they don't see a need for that. Was the same with a DESTDIR variable in chrony until I wanted to make an ebuild. Richard was quite pleased with the patch once he saw the need for that. Also if you read the man pages or some other sources and see the "*this stuff is insecure*" notices, they are all from 98 or 99. Nothing like that for the newer releases (well the man pages still contain it but they were not updated since 99) although I of course don't have the expertise to check myself if lsh is secure. But you might find it interesting that some people from the de.alt.sysadmin.recovery newsgroup will probably review the lsh codebase to their best knowledge. Naturally they want to get rid of openssh now :) Alex -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list