From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Thu Sep 24 15:55:49 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@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 B486B3FACC5 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 15:55:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4By0503CKYz4b7T; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 15:55:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id 08OFtjM3047063; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:55:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id 08OFtjKx047062; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:55:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <202009241555.08OFtjKx047062@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Refactoring calendar(1) (was: svn commit: r365984 - head/usr.bin/calendar/calendars) In-Reply-To: <20200923230708.GA53226@eureka.lemis.com> To: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:55:45 -0700 (PDT) CC: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Shawn Webb X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4By0503CKYz4b7T X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net has no SPF policy when checking 69.59.192.140) smtp.mailfrom=freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.62 / 15.00]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.84)[-0.842]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.83)[-0.828]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[dnsmgr.net]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.15)[0.155]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:13868, ipnet:69.59.192.0/19, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-arch]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 15:55:49 -0000 -- Start of PGP signed section. > [Trimmed] > > People, please adjust your posts. It's hard fighting your way through > a lot of expired verbiage. > > On Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 9:18:27 -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 7:43 AM Shawn Webb > > wrote: > > > >> Would it make sense to prune calendar entries to only BSD-related > >> entries? > > > > Fortunately, I have already contacted grog@ directly. He was quite > > receptive to my email suggesting something be done. After a couple of > > rounds, there's the rough plan we're talking about. Briefly: > > > > 1. ... > > > > So, it's just an outline at this time, which is why I hadn't sent a > > concrete proposal here just yet. Wanted to at least get a list of > > the files that would remain so we can have an intelligent discussion > > about those, but since this showed up I thought I'd send a heads up > > so people know what's going on. > > The real issue is: what do we remove? Summarizing imp@'s points, I > think that the base functionality of calendar(1) should stay, and so > should the FreeBSD-related calendar files. There's really a question > as to whether the non-FreeBSD related ones should remain anywhere > (including as a port). As somebody said, they're a relict of a bygone > day, and some are very inaccurate. I seem to be the only one > maintaining them, and even that is not without criticism. It might be > a better idea to write a completely new port that sucks in calendar > entries from *somewhere* and makes BSD-compliant calendar files out of > them. So, as imp@ says, it would be good to discuss which files > should go and which should remain. > > While I have your attention, does anybody think that the -a option of > calendar(1) is worth keeping? It goes through *all* calendar files on > a system and mails them to the owner. It has the interesting side > effect (we wouldn't want to call it a bug) that root gets three copies > (one each for root, toor and daemon). I can't see anything useful > there that a per-user cron job can't do. What the per-user cron job does is create a larger workload for systems that are expecting all users to be running calendar, as possible in an acedemic system which each student has a login. One may even setup systems that pre-populate account calendar files with such data. Though this is also probably a "long gone" era, I would not rule out that someone may be doing this. And as I have stated in other threads on the -a option, it is totally valid that a site may seperate root and toor, infact I do that on 2 of my systems. And the daemon thing is, well, easily fixed if one is annoyed by it to change to /etc/alias entry to dump daemon mail to /dev/null. And IMHO it is just kinda "wrong" for root to have a .calendar file anyway, that is using root for things you probably should not be doing. > Greg > -- > Sent from my desktop computer. > See complete headers for address and phone numbers. > This message is digitally signed. If your Microsoft mail program > reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA -- End of PGP section, PGP failed! -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org