Confusion over versioning...

[J. Paul Reed]

On Wed, 17 May 2000, Markus Friedl wrote:

> On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 03:43:23AM -0700, J. Paul Reed wrote:
> > So, my question is is the 1.2.x branch of OpenSSH effectively dead?
> 
> there are no branches of OpenSSH.  version numbers are arbitrary.
> version numbers only tell you: beginning with version x this bug y is
> gone.

Ok...so this is different from how they originially did ssh (i.e. a 1.2.x
"branch" and a 2.x branch for ssh2).

> > I know
> > OpenSSH 2.1 does SSH1 as well, but I only really want ssh1. Is 1.2.x not
> > going to be maintained anymore, and will all the new bugfixes, etc. be
> > going into OpenSSH 2.x?
> 
> yes, only the current release will be maintained. or to put it in
> another way: 1.2.x is maintained and the maintained version is called
> 2.1.

Hmmm...had to think about that for a second, but it makes sense...thanks!

> what are the problems with OpenSSH 2.1 ? there is no need to enable
> protocol 2.

Is that a compile-time option? Can I disable ssh2 support in OpenSSH 2.1?

I've heard some bug reports from the field about people getting OpenSSH
2.1 to work...but I haven't tried, and for everyone who has a problem,
probably 10 people get it to work fine.

I also can say that I honestly don't know the difference between the ssh1
protocol and the ssh2 protocol; I just like ssh1 because I feel I have a
pretty good understanding of how it works, and don't feel like learning
the nuances of ssh2, if they differe significantly.

Basically, I'm just lazy. ;-)

Thanks for the answer.

Later,
Paul
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
  J. Paul Reed                  preed at sigkill.com || www.sigkill.com/preed
  Forget that I know anything about metallurgy, physics, or engineering, 
  and just tell me what the hell is going on. -- Dr. Venkman, Ghostbusters