Re: LSH (GPL'd SSH)

1999-01-26 Thread Daniel Quinlan
J.H.M. Dassen wrote: >> Another freeness issue (albeit a relatively minor one) is that currently >> lsh requires scsh (which is non-free) for the generation of include files >> (they are pregenerated in the tarball; the scsh scripts are needed only >> for development). It would be nice if someone

Re: LSH (GPL'd SSH)

1999-01-26 Thread Ben Collins
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 12:50:52PM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 16:49:57 -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > > NOTE: For those that are on the ball, they do seem to be considering > > removing idea from the base source and having it as a seperate module > > (similar to GnuPG's appr

Re: LSH (GPL'd SSH)

1999-01-26 Thread J.H.M. Dassen
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 16:49:57 -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > NOTE: For those that are on the ball, they do seem to be considering > removing idea from the base source and having it as a seperate module > (similar to GnuPG's approach). Another freeness issue (albeit a relatively minor one) is that

LSH (GPL'd SSH)

1999-01-25 Thread Ben Collins
I've just looked over some of the code for the latest LSH snapshot (1-21-99) and it seems to be turning into a decent program. It is lacking some critical features (listed below), but once they are implemented, we may want to consider this our ssh replacement (the final blow to the non-free softwar