From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 10 13:42:21 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78E9916A405; Thu, 10 May 2007 13:42:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53CFC13C484; Thu, 10 May 2007 13:42:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (wnspsl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l4ADgCOj007729; Thu, 10 May 2007 15:42:17 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id l4ADgCgg007728; Thu, 10 May 2007 15:42:12 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from olli) Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:42:12 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <200705101342.l4ADgCgg007728@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, wkoszek@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20070510134740.GA39021@FreeBSD.czest.pl> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-current User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 10 May 2007 15:42:17 +0200 (CEST) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 10 May 2007 14:00:51 +0000 Cc: Subject: Re: We don't really need two FTP daemons X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, wkoszek@FreeBSD.ORG List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 13:42:21 -0000 Wojciech A. Koszek wrote: > There is a lot of confusion caused by the fact of having two instances > of the FTP daemon present in our source tree. > > First one is src/libexed/ftpd/... > > Second one lies in src/contrib/lukemftpd/... > > We don't need to have both of them, unless one has much more powerful > functionality over the second. However, in my opinion the major purpose > of having FTP daemon in the base is possibility of fast configuration > with minimal cost, just to "get it up and running". > > I think first server fullfills this requirement. > > If you're FreeBSD user and administrator, there are several advantages > of having only one FTP server. > > I think first daemon was security reviewed by the previous FreeBSD > security officer, which is the biggest plus. lukemftpd(8) had some well > known problems present in the past. > > The first is updated and it's functionality is enhanced to meet > standards (see latest changes from Yar Tichy). > > Cost of maintainance of one server is lower. > > It saves a lot of confusion for users -- we have both daemons present in > a inetd.conf(8) file, without mentioning, whether a first is more > powerfull than the second one. > > Some discussions with FreeBSD developers made me feel that we may really > want to sort a "double FTP daemon" issue out. > > Could we decide if we really want to support lukemftpd(8) ? I think it would make sense to move lukemftpd to ports and remove it from the base system. It might be worth noting that lukemftp (the client) already is in ports. Well, in fact I'm not convinced that there has to be an FTP daemon in the base system at all. But I guess it's not possible to reach a consensus on removing all ftpds from the base completely. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd "... there are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are _obviously_ no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no _obvious_ deficiencies." -- C.A.R. Hoare, ACM Turing Award Lecture, 1980