From owner-freebsd-arch Sat Nov 11 7:47: 4 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from point.osg.gov.bc.ca (point.osg.gov.bc.ca [142.32.102.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5448B37B479 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2000 07:47:02 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by point.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.8) id HAA10734 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2000 07:46:56 -0800 Received: from passer.osg.gov.bc.ca(142.32.110.29) via SMTP by point.osg.gov.bc.ca, id smtpda10732; Sat Nov 11 07:46:40 2000 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by passer.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.11.1/8.9.1) id eABFkYk22365 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2000 07:46:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from cwsys9.cwsent.com(10.2.2.1), claiming to be "cwsys.cwsent.com" via SMTP by passer9.cwsent.com, id smtpdv22363; Sat Nov 11 07:46:07 2000 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by cwsys.cwsent.com (8.11.1/8.9.1) id eABFk7X04664 for ; Sat, 11 Nov 2000 07:46:07 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200011111546.eABFk7X04664@cwsys.cwsent.com> Received: from localhost.cwsent.com(127.0.0.1), claiming to be "cwsys" via SMTP by localhost.cwsent.com, id smtpdvG4475; Sat Nov 11 07:45:53 2000 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Reply-To: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group X-OS: FreeBSD 4.1.1-RELEASE X-Sender: cy To: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: updating rdist In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 11 Nov 2000 03:59:05 PST." <20001111035905.A82574@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 07:45:53 -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20001111035905.A82574@dragon.nuxi.com>, "David O'Brien" writes: > I have just committed a `44bsd-rdist' port. > So the question is, do we totally remove `rdist' from the base system, > or update it to rdist 6.1.5? The rdist port fails to fetch. In a heterogeneous environment with only 6.1.5 shipped in the base system we can only support rdist with Linux. With 44bsd-rdist we can support rdist with other UNIX systems like Solaris, Tru64-UNIX, etc. I would rather have no rdist and have the option of picking the one I need rather than have the bloat of an rdist that I will not use in a particular situation. (I would rather have an rdist that is compatible with the other 100+ Solaris and Tru64-UNIX systems I manage and the 50+ AIX systems our AIX team manages.) Now that it's in ports I perceive (please correct me if my perception is wrong) that less attention to security and bug fixing might be paid to rdist. Or do we have a commitment that the port will be maintained with as much attention as any software in the base system? Since we now have a 44bsd-rdist port, why don't we maintain it like we did the OpenSSH port: Check it out of the OpenBSD or NetBSD CVS repositories. Then again both rdists could be in contrib (bad for bloat, otherwise less work for those of us installing new systems) and checked out of OpenBSD or NetBSD on a periodic basis. On to another idea and another tangent: Why not leave both rdists in ports and have sysinstall ask the user whether 44bsd-rdist (compatible with most vendors UNIX systems), rdist6 (compatible with Linux), and/or rsync be installed. Enough new ideas for thought. Once again my burning question, will we pay as much attention to the 44bsd-rdist port as we did rdist in the base? And for my preference: If it has to be gone out of the base, then no rdist in the base. Let the user decide which version to install. (If I was managing 100+ Linux systems rather than 100+ Suns & Alphas my preference would obviously be biased differently). Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437 Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766 Team Leader, Sun/DEC Team Internet: Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA Province of BC To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message