The aim is to try to reduce the incidence of the two least helpful
classes of those reports: the ones which have just got mismatched
checksum files, and the ones which don't tell us the information that
would help.
I've shifted away from using the SVN revision number as a monotonic
version identifier (replacing it in the Windows version resource with
a count of days since an arbitrary epoch), and I've removed all uses
of SVN keyword expansion (replacing them with version information
written out by Buildscr).
While I'm at it, I've done a major rewrite of the affected code which
centralises all the computation of the assorted version numbers and
strings into Buildscr, so that they're all more or less alongside each
other rather than scattered across multiple source files.
I've also retired the MD5-based manifest file system. A long time ago,
it seemed like a good idea to arrange that binaries of PuTTY would
automatically cease to identify themselves as a particular upstream
version number if any changes were made to the source code, so that if
someone made a local tweak and distributed the result then I wouldn't
get blamed for the results. Since then I've decided the whole idea is
more trouble than it's worth, so now distribution tarballs will have
version information baked in and people can just cope with that.
[originally from svn r10262]
This option is available from the command line as '-hostkey', and is
also configurable through the GUI. When enabled, it completely
replaces all of the automated host key management: the server's host
key will be checked against the manually configured list, and the
connection will be allowed or disconnected on that basis, and the host
key store in the registry will not be either consulted or updated.
The main aim is to provide a means of automatically running Plink,
PSCP or PSFTP deep inside Windows services where HKEY_CURRENT_USER
isn't available to have stored the right host key in. But it also
permits you to specify a list of multiple host keys, which means a
second use case for the same mechanism will probably be round-robin
DNS names that select one of several servers with different host keys.
Host keys can be specified as the standard MD5 fingerprint or as an
SSH-2 base64 blob, and are canonicalised on input. (The base64 blob is
more unwieldy, especially with Windows command-line length limits, but
provides a means of specifying the _whole_ public key in case you
don't trust MD5. I haven't bothered to provide an analogous mechanism
for SSH-1, on the basis that anyone worrying about MD5 should have
stopped using SSH-1 already!)
[originally from svn r10220]
questionnaires in unfriendly formats like Excel, apparently in the
mistaken belief that we have some kind of incentive to answer them. I
hope I've managed to identify the key reason why they make this
mistake.
[originally from svn r10156]
page. Define in more detail what we mean by "Windows" in the Ports section of
the FAQ.
[originally from svn r8733]
[this svn revision also touched putty-website]
Attempts at damage limitation from the name similarity with pterm.
Also try to refresh the ports section of the FAQ a bit.
[originally from svn r8139]
[this svn revision also touched putty-website]
know how I'd go about retrieving money from them any more because my
last exchange transaction went through a company who subsequently
turned out to be dodgy; and a user points out that e-gold is in
legal trouble, which suggests that avoiding it is probably wise.
[originally from svn r7604]
rationale (as mailed to him):
I think you're right. I got the pronunciation there from the second edition
of the OED and my Collins dictionary at home, both of which believe that
"pretty" is pronounced /'prItI/, but, at least to me, those two vowels are
different. Both of them think that /i/ doesn't occur in English words, the
vowel in "beat" being /i:/. The third edition of the OED, though, adds /i/
as an English vowel in its pronunciation guide, with "happy" as an example
of its use. I'll update the FAQ following your suggestion.
[originally from svn r5989]
This was a bit rushed, and could doubtless be improved.
Also fix a couple of things I noted on the way, including:
- "pscp -ls" wasn't documented
- Windows XP wasn't mentioned enough
[originally from svn r5593]
discussed. Use Barrett and Silverman's convention of "SSH-1" for SSH protocol
version 1 and "SSH-2" for protocol 2 ("SSH1"/"SSH2" refer to ssh.com
implementations in this scheme). <http://www.snailbook.com/terms.html>
[originally from svn r5480]
single most frequently asked thing which isn't in the FAQ (it's in
feedback.but instead), so let's add it. I'm uncertain that the
people who mail us asking things like `how do I read my email' and
`how do I access $database' will successfully recognise this more
general question as one which includes their specific one, but it's
worth a try.
[originally from svn r5451]
