Re: Radius choices now that freeradius has been dropped from woody.
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 00:28:04 -0400, Chuck Peters wrote:
> > One of our techs wants to use freeradius on a production box, but now that
> > it has been dropped from woody I would rather use something else.
> Looking at
> the one problematic bug can be worked around by compiling from source - you
> could consider having both testing and unstable in the box's sources.list,
> pinning it to testing, but using freeradius from unstable.
I don't like the idea of doing that on production boxes running multiple
services becuase it seems likely that some security update will cause a
cascade of upgrades or break something. Most of the time unstable stuff
works fine, but sometimes it bites you in the ass. Maybe if we setup a
seperate box running not much other than the freeraduis it could be ok.
it says "radiusd-freeradius is too buggy. This is a grave bug, by Policy
s2.1.2. Maybe it will be ready for Woody+1."
What does the Woody+1 mean, a minor release/update to woody or does it
> People think I'm a nice guy, and the fact is that I'm a scheming, conniving
> bastard who doesn't care for any hurt feelings or lost hours of work if it
> just results in what I consider to be a better system.
> Linus Torvalds on the linux-kernel list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org