From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22567 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2009 01:41:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 22559 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jun 2009 01:41:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ew0-f213.google.com (HELO mail-ew0-f213.google.com) (209.85.219.213) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 27 Jun 2009 01:41:34 +0000 Received: by ewy9 with SMTP id 9so2416759ewy.2 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:41:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.210.76.4 with SMTP id y4mr984464eba.61.1246066891155; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:41:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.2.99? (cpc2-cmbg8-0-0-cust61.cmbg.cable.ntl.com [82.6.108.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm1113698eyb.25.2009.06.26.18.41.30 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:41:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A457BB5.4020109@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 01:41:00 -0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "The Vulgar And.... oh look! shiney shiney!" Subject: Re: Running 1.5 and 1.7 sshd in parallel References: <690f5ac90906260819j4a977530if44a82324eddc229@mail.gmail.com> <20090626152445.GP30864@calimero.vinschen.de> <20090626153538.GF30070@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20090626153538.GF30070@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2009-q2/txt/msg00050.txt.bz2 Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 05:24:45PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> On Jun 26 17:19, Federico Hernandez wrote: >>> Couldn't find anything on this: >>> >>> Would it be possible to run sshd 1.5 and 1.7 in parallel so one could >>> ssh into cygwin 1.5 and 1.7 on the same machine at the same time. Of >>> course on ssh would have to run on a different port. How would one >>> setup this? >> Let the sshds use different ports, for instance 22 and 2022. > > And if that doesn't work we'll certainly work non-stop, around the clock > to make sure that this crucial functionality is implemented. > > Maybe we need a new mailing list to deal with this issue. Whaddaya want? Inferential reasoning or something? cheers, DaveK