Sebastian Pipping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Colin Watson wrote:
>> I'm not keen. We only recently got rid of openssh-krb5, I have headaches >> enough keeping the Kerberos patch up to date although the upstream for >> that is excellent, and I don't want to increase my workload further by >> including more third-party patches. The more of these I include, the >> longer it takes to get new upstream releases packaged. > > could you (or matthew) sponsor me if i did the work? Speaking as one of the former maintainers of openssh-krb5 (for a brief period near the end of its life), I don't think this is a great idea. Maintaining a separate forked copy of the ssh code base in another package is painful from a security standpoint, and managing the shared configuration and conflicts and whatnot can be rather horrific. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
