authorized_keys2 directory idea
Rob Hagopian
rob at hagopian.net
Mon Jun 4 14:34:18 EST 2001
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 mouring at etoh.eviladmin.org wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Rob Hagopian wrote:
>
> > OpenSSH changed from the ssh.com directory method... not that that's
> > always a bad thing, I prefer not having a separate .ssh2 directory. But a
> > lot of other unix utils have moved to file based rather than line based
>
> No.. We did not. ssh.com decided not to use their old single file
> authorized_keys. As for which we should follow. I personally don't care.
> It's no harder to me to manage it as a single file or as multiple little
> files. And the arguments I've seen really does not improve the odds of us
> changing it.
But ssh.com v2 was around before OpenSSH... they fixed a lot of things
from v1 to v2, I liked that one and was disappointed to see openssh revert
back...
> > And I still think that if people support it, it surely belongs in contrib
> > for people to use at their own risk... what else is that for?
> > -Rob
> >
>
> I doubt Theo ever has had problems with contrib/ code. It's core
> software that we are refering to.
My suggestion was only to put it into /contrib... is that OK then?
-Rob
More information about the openssh-unix-dev
mailing list