Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 16:46:00 +0200 From: rainer@ultra-secure.de To: voidanix@420blaze.it Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Disabling COMPAT_FREEBSD4/5/6/7/9 as a default kernel option Message-ID: <eaaf7d3d03dbbee0bebd2769d25fcd54@ultra-secure.de> In-Reply-To: <ff7bfe10b7953d066e0f087b8d422b89@420blaze.it> References: <ff7bfe10b7953d066e0f087b8d422b89@420blaze.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 2019-05-27 15:55, schrieb voidanix@420blaze.it: > Hello, > I wanted to discuss about bug 231768 a bit: it is about keeping > COMPAT_FREEBSD4/5/6/7/9 on by default in the kernel configs. > > The patch attached for the bug is for disabling these options by > default, following a few reasons which I'm going to list here: > - Keeping support for deprecated libraries isn't exactly the best > we could do to avoid security issues (if there are any) as I'm sure > nobody wants to spend that much time maintaining such stuff (it's > enough to think about misc/compat4x in the ports tree: that version of > FreeBSD was released on March 2000 and keeping 19 years old libraries > around isn't ideal) > - Devs should get track of time and realize that developing > software using unsupported libraries is NOT something that you should > do > - Only a tiny fraction of the ports need COMPAT_FREEBSD9 or older: > if the software won't compile without the legacy components (and has a > replacement of some kind), considering removal wouldn't be a bad idea > - This is on by default: most users don't care or don't use > binaries that old > > I don't see any practical reason to keep these options on by default, > but I do appreciate any sort of input regarding this issue. I have a 32bit FreeBSD 6 binary that I'll need for a bit until the department who is technically responsible for the service gets around redoing that service.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?eaaf7d3d03dbbee0bebd2769d25fcd54>