Subject: Re: USE_SSH, comments please
To: Frederick Bruckman <fb@enteract.com>
From: None <mcmahill@mtl.mit.edu>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 08/24/2000 17:04:45
On Thu, 24 Aug 2000, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2000 mcmahill@mtl.mit.edu wrote:
>
> > .if defined(USE_SSH)
> > # first provide defaults. If we have ssh in the base system
> > # use that as a default, otherwise use the security/ssh package
> > # as a default.
> > .if exists(/usr/bin/ssh)
> > PKG_SSH?= /usr/bin/ssh
> > .else
> > PKG_SSH?= ssh
> > .endif
>
> Probably, "openssh" should be the default. That's closer to what we're
> eventually going to get in the base system. We could use "ssh" for
> any architectures for which "openssh" is known to be broken.
> This also looks a little twisty to me, in that PKG_SSH can be
> set to either a package name, or a full path. How about...
I want to be sure that the user can over ride a default if they choose.
Thoughts on that?
> .if defined(USE_SSH)
> .if exists(/usr/bin/ssh)
> SSH= /usr/bin/ssh
> .else
> SSH= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/ssh
> PKG_SSH?= openssh
> DEPENDS+= ${PKG_SSH}-*:../../security/${PKG_SSH}
> .endif
> .endif
>
> ?
>
> Also, probably best not to force ${SSH} into "MAKE_ENV". Do all the
> packages that need "ssh" respect the environment variable? If so, then
> maybe it's OK.
probably none do... The one I'm most familiar with has it hardcoded :(
-Dan