Re: lsh 0.1 released (gpl'ed ssh)
On Wed, Jun 02, 1999 at 12:08:04 +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> Do you happen to know what the deal is as far as being contaminated by
> having seen ssh code ?
IANAL.
> Are they trying to ensure clean room conditions as far as the ssh code is
> concerneted ?
I'm not sure how clean room conditions can be created at all when the ssh
code is free for download.
SSH want SSH2 to be a proper RFC, so there must be an independent
implementation; I'm doubt they're completely unhappy about lsh.
> On a related subject, has anyone else looked at packaging lsh?
I have a preliminary debianisation (mainly because it helps me compile it
easier). There are a couple of problems with packaging lsh I can see now.
- The daemon isn't a real daemon yet. I have patches for that which haven't
been incorporated upstream.
- It relies on a non-free interpreter (scsh) for building. Tommi Virtanen has
sent me details on how to use scm instead, so it'll be fit for non-us/main
rather than non-us/contrib.
- I don't know how to resolve the port conflict. Port 22 is for the SSH
protocol, both v1 and v2. lsh can fallback to calling sshd1 (just like
sshd2 can), but I'm not sure how to properly ensure it, rather than sshd1,
gets port 22.
- Last time I checked, lsh and SSH2 weren't interoperable yet. (SSH2 used
to not implement the spec properly; some improvements were made, but the
issue isn't gone yet I fear)
Ray
--
LEADERSHIP A form of self-preservation exhibited by people with auto-
destructive imaginations in order to ensure that when it comes to the crunch
it'll be someone else's bones which go crack and not their own.
- The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
Reply to: