Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 06:58:00 +1000 From: Sue Blake <sue@welearn.com.au> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@freebsd.org> Cc: "C. Stephen Gunn" <csg@waterspout.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Outdated rdist in FreeBSD Base Message-ID: <20000419065759.W3179@welearn.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004181228520.95988-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>; from Kris Kennaway on Tue, Apr 18, 2000 at 12:29:36PM -0700 References: <20000418184259.U3179@welearn.com.au> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004181228520.95988-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 18, 2000 at 12:29:36PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2000, Sue Blake wrote:
>
> > v6 works fundamentally differently to and is incompatible with the old
> > rdist, if ours is the same as the old rdist that was in BSD/OS. It is
> > quite unfortunate that two programs using different protocols have been
> > given the same name.
>
> If this is true then we could have two rdist ports, an rdist5 one which is
> compatible with legacy systems and the more modern rdist6 port.
That'll give a convenient and easy answer to support questions.
But what of the site that has scores of servers that have been using
rdist for years, that upgrades FreeBSD and finds that a system failure
is due to rdist suddenly being absent, installs the new program named
rdist with the higher version number, changes the scripts to suit it,
and has two consecutive nights of failed crons before discovering that
the two "versions" of rdist are different programs?
If 50 machines of various types suddenly have to have a new rdist
compiled on each of them, this represents a real $ cost. At least it'd
be nice to know before the incident rather than after, and the forced
solution should involve changing the least number of machines.
Upgrading a basic utility is not as simple on other systems, and here
we are talking about a program specifically used for interacting with
other systems. For example, at my work we have a particular Dynix/ptx
system that has refused to compile most of what has been tried, and one
Digital UNIX system that we have agreed not to alter for a few weeks
while work is being done on a new database. "Install the newer program"
is not as simple as it sounds, when you are running non-FreeBSD
systems which is exactly where rdist is often used. You're not just
demanding that FreeBSD systems upgrade, you're demanding that all of
them be upgraded or risk multiple failures. That's a big ask.
If the alternative is to provide a second port, then people need to be
warned when upgrading FreeBSD that rdist no longer exists in the base
system, and the differences between the ports needs to be explained
well to the majority who haven't heard of these incompatibilities
before. We're talking about the potential cost of two nights of
network-wide cron failures plus adding a new program to multiple
non-FreeBSD systems under time pressure.
But let's get this into perspective. Hell, if that kind of problem only
happens to one or two large commercial sites and to nobody that we know
personally, I guess it's not very important, is it? :,)
I would argue, referring to its documentation, that rdist6 expects to
find the old rdist on the system somewhere with the name "oldrdist" in
order to do all that it can do. Therefore if there is not an "oldrdist"
file included with the base system (my preference), it should be
installed _with_ the rdist6 port in order to offer rdist6's complete
functionality. That would not solve all of the problems I have raised
(rdist still disappears to ports), but it would be a compromise that
would show some respect for those using FreeBSD seriously.
--
Regards,
-*Sue*-
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000419065759.W3179>