From owner-freebsd-current Wed Mar 5 2:14:20 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24DDE37B401 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 02:14:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EBAA43FB1 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 02:14:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from DougB@freebsd.org) Received: from master.gorean.org (12-234-22-23.client.attbi.com[12.234.22.23]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with SMTP id <2003030510141600300agotme>; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:14:17 +0000 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 02:14:16 -0800 (PST) From: Doug Barton To: Subscriber Cc: "FreeBSD-Current (E-mail)" Subject: Re: Plea for base system trim In-Reply-To: <2F03DF3DDE57D411AFF4009027B8C36704129AE6@exchange-uk.isltd.insignia.com> Message-ID: <20030305015947.M18288@znfgre.tberna.bet> References: <2F03DF3DDE57D411AFF4009027B8C36704129AE6@exchange-uk.isltd.insignia.com> Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ X-message-flag: Outlook -- Not just for spreading viruses anymore! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Subscriber wrote: > Would the powers that be please consider removing sendmail, > bind and openssl from the base system, as was done for perl > with 5.0? This topic has been discussed ad nauseum, and the consensus has always been that those three things (and openssh) should stay in. Please see the archives for the reasoning. For example, as BIND maintainer I actually _support_ the theory of removing BIND, however the reality is a little different. There are three main components of BIND; the named stuff (sbin/named, sbin/ndc, etc.), the userland stuff (dig, host, etc.), and the resolver library. Of those three things, we actually need the last two in order to include ourselves in a useful definition of "Unix system" (although I'd LOVE to nuke nslookup, if I thought I could ever live down the whining and crying it would cause). So keeping BIND in the base actually serves a purpose. Similar arguments can be made for the other components you listed. Now that said, I've been working off and on to make it easier to replace parts of the base with stuff from the ports. Both BIND ports have PORT_REPLACES_BASE_ Makefile options, and I know that they are useful because I use them at work. I have a proposal document and some patches that both need polishing to create a "standard" way to do this. My long term goal (although this is not necessarily shared by other people in the project) is to make it easier to create a modular system that takes advantage of the ports exclusively for contrib code. Of course, we've been talking about this for 8 years too, so don't hold your breath. :) > Having just done two rebuilds for recent OpenSSL and sendmail > vulnerabilities, I was surprised to discover that building the port > of apache13-modssl required the build of a port version of > OpenSSL when I had the most updated (4.7) base system with > OpenSSL in it!. That sounds like a mistake to me, but I'm not familiar with the details. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message