On 2/7/02 at 10:07 AM, Jack Coates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've always been attracted by this, even to the point of > installed an OpenBSD 2.9 system to futz with.
I bought OpenBSD 2.6 - and just invested in OpenBSD 3.0 :) Nice thing to install on a Quadra 800 :) Just installed OpenBSD 3.0 over the net to an i386 too... > But now, you're discussing doing something like this for > LEAF. I do not like the idea of LEAF having its own > development environment at all. As it stands currently, > most default LEAF installs could be hooked up to the > Internet with telnet wide open and no root password > without causing a lot of damage -- the only really > hazardous tool in there is ping, and the SSH packages > don't include scp. There's no lrzsz or uuencode or nc, so > uploading all those evil packages you've made is very > difficult, and there's no compiler or headers so uploading > source and compiling it is impossible. All that changes if > the bad guy can merely cd > /usr/src/ports/net/ettercap. I'm not talking of putting a development environment into a router; I'd be horrified if anyone did such a thing! However, when you are configuring a router, a make && make install with scp and keys would be nice - and a call to ssh -c apkg -i /tmp/mypkg.lrp would be too. In fact, using NFS from the LEAF box has this benefit as well - except its harder to extract NFS support from the box before you put it out in harms way. This is also nice if you are developing for LEAF - especially the NFS method. You can cd into the NFS mount, chroot, compile, install AND test right away. This would be VERY close to developing for LEAF on LEAF... -- David Douthitt UNIX Systems Administrator HP-UX, Unixware, Linux [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
