Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2018 09:43:37 -0700 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org>, "O'Connor, Daniel" <darius@dons.net.au> Subject: Re: What to do about rcmdsh(3) ? Message-ID: <CAF6rxg=8NkScfE1YFri%2B4eriTeq_et78DAzLpXdv3=dDNMFLDA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <a16098ab-45a8-7e52-d692-76ec723337b3@FreeBSD.org> References: <201807030330.w633Uchd087857@slippy.cwsent.com> <a16098ab-45a8-7e52-d692-76ec723337b3@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'm new at this. How does one do that? On Tuesday, 3 July 2018, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 7/2/18 8:30 PM, Cy Schubert wrote: > > In message <CAF6rxgmJZyivZtQDKnUa12DJ5PqWVp40wOQg5Wt8zJWeuUUJYg@mail.gma > > il.com> > > , Eitan Adler writes: > >> On 26 June 2018 at 23:45, O'Connor, Daniel <darius@dons.net.au> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> On 27 Jun 2018, at 13:01, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 24 June 2018 at 05:14, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 03:32:13AM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote: > >>>>>> Now that the rcmds are removed from base, it opens a question about > >>>>>> what to do with rcmdsh(3). > >>>>>> This is documented as > >>>>>> rcmdsh ??? return a stream to a remote command without superuser > >>>>>> And is implemented as a rather simple wrapper of getaddrinfo and > exec. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This isn't something I'd imagine we'd add to libc now-a-days and is > >>>>>> currently broken by default (due to defaulting to _PATH_RSH) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm not sure there is much value in keeping this function around. I > >>>>>> did a rather naive search for uses of this function in ports and > >>>>>> couldn't find any. I'm preparing a more comprehensive patch for an > >>>>>> exp-run. > >>>>> There is a huge value in keeping ABI compatibility. The symbol must > be k > >> ept. > >>>>> You may remove default version for the symbol if you are so inclined. > >>>> > >>>> I'm new at this. How does one do that? > > > > > If you wanted to retire the symbol as suggested > by kib@ that would also be fine and would prevent new applications from > using it going forward (but you don't get to remove the source from libc). Sounds like a plan. I'm new at this. How does one do that? -- Sent from my Turing Machine
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxg=8NkScfE1YFri%2B4eriTeq_et78DAzLpXdv3=dDNMFLDA>