From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Mon Apr 5 12:58:04 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@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 9469E5B7479 for ; Mon, 5 Apr 2021 12:58:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asomers@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ot1-f46.google.com (mail-ot1-f46.google.com [209.85.210.46]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FDW0q4jBHz4Vfh for ; Mon, 5 Apr 2021 12:58:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asomers@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ot1-f46.google.com with SMTP id k14-20020a9d7dce0000b02901b866632f29so11285121otn.1 for ; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 05:58:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=IYt0GHnRS8jhK9NLCZtv75iLTapOSRb61sWM6okhBko=; b=LtD1YswJxJuPK1p04DvIodx95omumKyOSCA9WcCNGd57010xDGGAEJd4nMAfBPxbNY qtjIqohNHbnPRubHC0mHWZ5ddaDtCCjXx4aT0zdO3QQF/SNW9nF43UP9vc3AuZsKtePU oZvV7bbR3Z5cRtd/1mrmLGTkYeHYeiuiL1MhctUoynkU0rZO+HIES8vuF0OB5RgEn8ui 1qHQVMAWlnFjI5bwOdniuGsAorlNW2lb1+SvKutCUx7B90+FntBFywadVo0TA3AluC5A kUgk8icY/EedYcxgPSvStujo0QpS09DEZ+qmznqXFHZfkCUD6shMrxUfDfOwoqQJi4Zu czpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5337JSi+je6jWGjqepL0i5YnW37vPFBXcUI15+i529Ms3/CD80V2 pe7kvdNDIJx2n1CV8t8vT9JodBhWoa7nUU6RbiBvKhd5z2k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxVom6cVkQI3DVusN2WOg2k8Z8SMIvbpXTVmHhH3gwcvcJpsHBg6kFhe7dJ9D/3uyuRF8BOdheLuaJt2PxeGV0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1af6:: with SMTP id c22mr21351877otd.291.1617627482418; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 05:58:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0070fa8d-1e9c-89c7-f0a8-40aace3030d8@quip.cz> <606A920C.8030502@grosbein.net> In-Reply-To: <606A920C.8030502@grosbein.net> From: Alan Somers Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2021 06:57:51 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Deprecating base system ftpd? To: Eugene Grosbein Cc: Dave Cottlehuber , FreeBSD Stable X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4FDW0q4jBHz4Vfh X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of asomers@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.46 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=asomers@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.00 / 15.00]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(0.00)[209.85.210.46:from]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[asomers@freebsd.org,asomers@gmail.com]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[209.85.210.46:from]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[asomers]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-stable@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[asomers@freebsd.org,asomers@gmail.com]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[209.85.210.46:from:127.0.2.255]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[209.85.210.46:from]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-stable] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2021 12:58:04 -0000 On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 10:29 PM Eugene Grosbein wrote: > On 05.04.2021 06:25, Dave Cottlehuber wrote: > > > Eugene mentioned the convenience of ftpd in the same sentence as ipsec. > > I'm willing to bet those systems have ports installed too. > > Ports/packages are great but they are not replacement for solid operating > system > with bundled software tested and proven with time. > > > If speed is an issue, HTTP supports pipelining, compression, chunked > > encoding, & parallel connections. I'm not sure ftpd is even in the same > > game anymore. > > Compression and various encodings of raw data are not good for speed. > sendfile(2) system call used by ftpd to send raw data is good for speed. > Unlimited CPU power should not be assumed. > > > The more code we hang onto in base, the larger the millstone around our > > necks when moving forwards. Each individual opportunity to slim down > > base *in itself* is not significant, but cumulatively they represent > > gridlock. > > > > For each removal or deprecation, please consider, is this worth holding > > the project back for? > > Our ftpd code does not hold the project back in any way. It's here, it > works, it's very good. > > High quality bundled software is what we love FreeBSD for. > Unfortunately, ports tend to rot more quick due to some known reasons. > I wouldn't say that anything is "very good" when it has no test suite whatsoever. If you want to help, you could write one. You might take a look at libexec/tftpd/tests/ to get started. -Alan