From owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org Wed Jul 24 20:33:04 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F674B7FAF for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 20:33:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-security-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from be-well.ilk.org (be-well.ilk.org [23.30.133.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58383730DB for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 20:33:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-security-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix, from userid 1147) id 2AE4633C28; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 16:32:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Lowell Gilbert To: "Wall\, Stephen" Cc: "freebsd-security\@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Old Stuff References: Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 16:32:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Stephen Wall's message of "Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:29:16 +0000") Message-ID: <444l3bxjew.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 58383730DB X-Spamd-Bar: ++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [2.84 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.71)[0.712,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[ilk.org]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.90)[0.903,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: be-well.ilk.org]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.16)[0.163,0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7922, ipnet:23.30.0.0/15, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.08)[ip: (0.15), ipnet: 23.30.0.0/15(0.10), asn: 7922(0.17), country: US(-0.05)]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 20:33:04 -0000 "Wall, Stephen" writes: >> From: owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- >> security@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Aaron C. de Bruyn via freebsd- >> security >> Subject: Re: Old Stuff >> >>On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 9:58 AM Robert Simmons wrote: >> >>> I wonder if FreeBSD should drop support for 32bit? Clean out and remove all >>> of it. It should make the code base easier to maintain, cleaner, and safer. >>> >>> In this same vein, let's deprecate and remove things like telnet and ftp. >> >> Why remove telnet and FTP? > > Why not? It's not difficult to install ftp as needed from the ports > tree - there are a number of clients and servers available there, > including a newer version of tnftp, which is what appears in freebsd > base. I can't imagine it would be very difficult to migrate the base > telnet to ports, either. It'd be a bit less cruft in the base system > that has to be maintained. That applies to tftp as well. > > Unless the base system is actually using any of them. I don't know that. If I recall correctly, the base has knobs for not building them, so it must work okay without them. I think there would be some complaints if they were moved to ports, but not many. >> From: owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- >> security@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Igor Mozolevsky >> Subject: Re: Old Stuff >> >> On Wednesday, 24 July 2019, Robert Simmons wrote: >> > I wonder if FreeBSD should drop support for 32bit? Clean out and remove all >> > of it. It should make the code base easier to maintain, cleaner, and safer. >> >> Because nobody has a 32bit computer nowadays??? Similarly, you got any >> empirical evidence to back up the "... safer" part of your speculation? > > I have to agree with Igor here - there are still 32-bit SOCs out there > intended for embedded use. It's likely there are commercial users of > FreeBSD developing for those platforms. Quite a few, in fact. Ditching 32-bit is not a practical idea.