[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposed: task-secure-system package



>>>>> "Brian" == Brian May <bam@debian.org> writes:

>>>>> "Sean" == Sean 'Shaleh' Perry <shaleh@valinux.com> writes:
    Sean> Don Marti has often joked about a task-no-clear-text which
    Sean> would remove any package which provides a daemon sending
    Sean> clear text passwords.

    Brian> He might only be joking, but I probably should point out for this
    Brian> discussion that this might not be easy.

    Brian> For instance, a package that conflicts with "telnetd" would
    Brian> automatically conflict with telnetd-ssl and heimdal-servers, too (as
    Brian> both of these provide "telnetd").

    Brian> Of course, the correct fix would be to have a new virtual package name
    Brian> "telnet-server", which would be in line with the "rsh-server",
    Brian> "ftp-server", "telnet-client", and "rsh-client" which already exist
    Brian> for woody.

    Brian> (now I wonder when I created rsh-server and ftp-server, why
    Brian> I didn't say ftp-client and telnet-server, too - at least
    Brian> thats the way I remember it).

I guess you followed the RULE: virtual packages are only created on
"we need it" basis (as outlined in
debian-policy/virtual-package-names-list.text.gz).  And
ftp-client/telnet-server weren't needed, so you didn't create them.

Which is, IMHO, a pretty stupid policy... a feature-based thing (with
compatible interfaces, of course) would be more logical.  Think about
what might be needed, not just what *is* (when I buy a new HD, I don't
buy just enough so what I need now fits, I buy in anticipation of
future needs (and according to what I can afford ;-)

Bye, J

-- 
Jürgen A. Erhard    juergen.erhard@gmx.net   phone: (GERMANY) 0721 27326
     MARS: http://members.tripod.com/Juergen_Erhard/mars_index.html
        The Python Programming Language (http://www.python.org)
                     Shah, shah!  Ayatollah you so!

Attachment: pgp6VfqgDVdEJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: