Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 08:48:05 -0700 From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca> To: James Wyatt <jwyatt@rwsystems.net> Cc: Greg Lewis <glewis@trc.adelaide.edu.au>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeSSH Message-ID: <199910161549.IAA67111@cwsys.cwsent.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 13 Oct 1999 13:14:01 CDT." <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910131307410.60569-100000@bsdie.rwsystems.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910131307410.60569-100000@bsdie.rwsystems.net>, Jame
s Wyatt writes:
> On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Greg Lewis wrote:
> > In the interests of minimising bloat we could balance its inclusion by
> > deleting something like, say, uucp.
> > (:-) for the uucps users)
>
> As another heavy UUCP user on several machine here (and owner of CD sets
> for 2.26/2.28/3.2/3.3/etc...) I wouldn't mind a wel-done package if it
> still used /etc/uucp and added the UUCP user. I also would not mind it
> being another optinal binset on the install.
>
> I have been saving a fair amount of room on my hosts by removing the yp
> executables we *never* want and the 3MB+ of Japanese manpages we can't
> read. I'm sure there are more examples of 'things that could be default
> unchecked boxes in the install' things. - Jy@
Then again, I use YP (behind a firewall of course) with "*" in the
password field and KRB5 for authentication.
I think that everybody has their favorite package they wish to remove.
In our shop, including the team I manage, everyone uses RedHat desktops,
except for me of course. Most people I work with don't use the C
compiler so they don't install it from the RedHat distribution. The
point is that there are probably a bunch of FreeBSD users who don't use
the C compiler either and from their point of view, as ludicrous as it
sounds, it too should be removed.
Each of us has a different requirement and expectation from FreeBSD.
The current FreeBSD maintenance strategy, notwithstanding my previous
ramblings in previous notes this morning, is a good one. I think that
the bloat caused by UUCP, YP, NFS, and Sendmail is small. For example
on my server here at home, FreeBSD uses only 200 MB, the source tree
takes up another 230 MB, the FreeBSD CVS tree (w/o ports) uses 600 MB,
X and X packages take up 210 MB, /compat/linux uses 40 MB, /usr/local
uses 275 MB, and Star OFfice uses 140 MB. My 486/33 which has
FreeBSD & W95 installed uses,
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
/dev/wd0s1a 199115 142352 40834 78% /
/dev/wd0s2 168612 126796 41816 75% /dos
The 486/33 is small because it relies on my server for X and packages
when FreeBSD is running, and MS-Office via Samba when W95 is running.
In short I don't think that a 200 MB O/S is bloatware. Some of the
additional applications installed are bloatware -- e.g. how can an
office application, Star Office, be almost as large as an operating
system?
Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437
Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766
Sun/DEC Team, UNIX Group Internet: Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca
ITSD Cy.Schubert@gems8.gov.bc.ca
Province of BC
"e**(i*pi)+1=0"
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199910161549.IAA67111>