Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 20:31:32 -0700 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: What to do about rcmdsh(3) ? Message-ID: <CAF6rxgkyLFwrLFUH3sRTPDMMcUHJEWo6tG6BKdW8h0X2E9xzgg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20180624121412.GY2430@kib.kiev.ua> References: <CAF6rxg=LbpQ1NfLQN%2B6hH61HusTdZ8hiuFfxXKb5sU_8oidROw@mail.gmail.com> <20180624121412.GY2430@kib.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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 kept. > You may remove default version for the symbol if you are so inclined. I'm new at this. How does one do that? -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgkyLFwrLFUH3sRTPDMMcUHJEWo6tG6BKdW8h0X2E9xzgg>