Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 13:56:52 +0100
From: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
To: Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com>
Cc: alpine-aports@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: [alpine-aports] [PATCH] main/openssh: upgrade to 7.6_p1
Message-ID: <20171228135652.4043e83d@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
In-Reply-To: <20171227021831.GB3081@cirno.my.domain>
References: <20171223164949.16984-1-sir@cmpwn.com>
	<20171225145410.4885e60f@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw>
	<20171225145733.GB2967@cirno.my.domain>
	<20171227021831.GB3081@cirno.my.domain>
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 26 Dec 2017 20:18:32 -0600
Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com> wrote:

> On 2017-12-25 , Drew DeVault wrote:
> > On 2017-12-25 , Natanael Copa wrote:  
> > > I don't think that we want remove the dynwindows patch, which
> > > significantly improves scp performance.  
> > 
> > After further investigation, I understand the purpose of these patches
> > better, and I disagree with their inclusion. For one, it would block
> > releasing openssh 7.6_p1, as the patches have not been ported forward.
> > However, I question their inclusion at all - why are we pulling along a
> > huge patchset in a core (and security sensitive) package that upstream
> > has been refusing for years?  
> 
> I came across this article today supporting my point, albeit for FreeBSD:
> 
> https://vez.mrsk.me/freebsd-defaults.txt
> 
> It doesn't seem that it's even necessary for good performance on scp
> these days. Holding back OpenSSH so we have time to backport
> highly questionable patches is a really bad idea. Please consider
> merging my patch to remove it from the package and upgrade OpenSSH -
> though initially a mistake, this is now intentional.
> 

I think you are right. Lets drop HPN in edge and see what happens.

-nc


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-aports+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-aports+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---