From nobody Wed Dec 18 13:51:50 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4YCw8S0DRGz5hNV0 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 13:51:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kevans@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "R10" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4YCw8R6g7Jz4Gdq; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 13:51:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kevans@FreeBSD.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1734529911; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lpiIkmozQF1CYemj0yROaEWSLXn9qBTLb8o0G9PwswI=; b=oSE58TqyPNIWrDddl6qbeGrpeFkjq1lkvUtqotlnIHjdKYywjaUte3TQlWoSBERvwy2Gxu reZaazh0MxXtK2IjROu7bhfvy/W32xvxZHrUFNfeBRJyh8eM2lWRgnkHDk5tSQIHG6cpOI VpH2fJgebuNxFYPm8O0xMR4c3/3Wq1ag5Q8gF1n4A1/gQt30bshscg6qfeyHcN+ybpuYgm uGRHcuV2bm1vkKMd9wxGvzPSkLMbOrgUoxMkdR51Mi6Ju1ctpheURl2RSQBau10ada97+e v+IbZNU8ZHrXGv0t9qy4OaIs/5bgOyQoPMkB6HJpY2ZAEMQfl4GMPL0hpqWSVQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1734529911; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lpiIkmozQF1CYemj0yROaEWSLXn9qBTLb8o0G9PwswI=; b=FNsvVx3NRwQ0hjVSQeI5tWfjYLX9BXLXfNDL+VBOsN5O0KtmnHcze8px/cD8kPul8cc9ud m6kJGmZGyFGFH28NyAme9xKHhl977GN7WB9mDlr0s3u2nMZ6yVIxv1yALA548HBvgt3MRW u+xt+9tYuEQ4ITgEul8uA88wxZRej19GSdWZzwTkZS5OFjRxHC0EKTxsKOsY9qEBuI3Xfx FqbHlahxroPIEW8IXJiT0S7CoZymhXbEMoYIz/7VBLPpxcE6f32zDgqDoqlAOFA680BnxQ 0zuRoASXjldIAP3WiRkSqmUP1kUEZ3oueVMGnqlip7laTOB+UZmYkUUSaQ7LTw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1734529911; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=cY5PZ1JxgXsrc8bOtfgTgWXiirDUu+Lx+BK6h2UPGuiwGbkyzANK8YGtQvKTmpaD4Ecjjs Fd9of27ZtfVvB1CIfK2XPlSKHRn4keQap4mftTp9wmopt+uQvsykslK76h6XfQfPIUq+Vs SaztlA3U/sTnx0RDHOe9NXlftLRa9xeu4DStPIgO5GFdYqX0Djdm/NbTxnnUvzAka3wV0c wnK68oc4KUzwLWdfVw6woQIewS/Rb4HphsYSDakOKxo+HDOSdILOkUmbC6ay9Q4movXCwD vZBxmDHmPAQhg8LgnWwLwRnXNM5229Kb/K1l+LqOwsJWNl5Ixf8ASIPH4keQMg== Received: from [10.9.4.95] (unknown [209.182.120.176]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: kevans/mail) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YCw8R4nhpz1Cgr; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 13:51:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kevans@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 07:51:50 -0600 List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-arch List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Removing shar(1) To: Robert Clausecker Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org References: <0d63a94d-2773-4efd-b789-0b753ab38b91@FreeBSD.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Kyle Evans In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/18/24 05:04, Robert Clausecker wrote: > Hi Kyle, > > With shar no longer being recommended for the submission of new ports, > I see no objection to removing this feature. However, tar(1) should > keep the functionality. > I make no proposal to remove it from tar- that'd be really annoying after recommending people use tar(1) instead both here and in the patch below. > We should consider replacing shar(1) by an implementation that just calls > into tar(1) to do its job. > Strongly prefer not to if we can avoid it (I'm not seeing any arguments that we really need it to be a first-class citizen); I view that as promoting functionality that we shouldn't be encouraging, along with providing a manpage. > Yours, > Robert Clausecker > > Am Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 08:27:16PM -0600 schrieb Kyle Evans: >> Hi, >> >> I was reminded the other day that shar(1) exists, though it's use is no >> longer recommended in ports. The same functionality can be found in tar(1) >> instead, so I think we should deorbit /usr/bin/shar and stop promoting it >> entirely. sh(1) archives are really problematic from a user standpoint for >> at least one reason best explained by the manpage: >> >> It is easy to insert trojan horses into shar files. It is strongly >> recommended that all shell archive files be examined before running >> them through sh(1). Archives produced using this implementation of >> shar may be easily examined with the command: >> >> egrep -av '^[X#]' shar.file >> >> It's hard to advocate for their use in good conscience, much like it's hard >> to advocate curl|sh pipes. >> >> Review: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D48130 >> >> Thanks, >> >> Kyle Evans >> >