From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 10 21:37:37 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 23FD916A409 for ; Thu, 10 May 2007 21:37:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dunstan@freebsd.czest.pl) Received: from freebsd.czest.pl (freebsd.czest.pl [80.48.250.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38C8213C4C3 for ; Thu, 10 May 2007 21:37:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dunstan@freebsd.czest.pl) Received: from freebsd.czest.pl (freebsd.czest.pl [80.48.250.4]) by freebsd.czest.pl (8.13.4/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4AMCMk6045022 for ; Thu, 10 May 2007 22:12:22 GMT (envelope-from dunstan@freebsd.czest.pl) Received: (from dunstan@localhost) by freebsd.czest.pl (8.13.4/8.12.9/Submit) id l4AMCMxS045021 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Thu, 10 May 2007 22:12:22 GMT (envelope-from dunstan) Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 22:12:21 +0000 From: "Wojciech A. Koszek" To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20070510221221.GA44910@FreeBSD.czest.pl> Mail-Followup-To: "Wojciech A. Koszek" , freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20070510134740.GA39021@FreeBSD.czest.pl> <200705101342.l4ADgCgg007728@lurza.secnetix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Greylist: Sender DNS name whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (freebsd.czest.pl [80.48.250.4]); Thu, 10 May 2007 22:12:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: We don't really need two FTP daemons X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list 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 21:37:37 -0000 On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 08:34:31AM -0700, gnn@freebsd.org wrote: > At Thu, 10 May 2007 15:42:12 +0200 (CEST), > Oliver Fromme wrote: > > > > 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. > > > > Getting to one would be a good move. > > Wojchiech, are you proposing a patch to do the removal? It would be > good to see what you propose removing, just for safety sake. > George, Here's a patch that should be complete lukemftpd(8) removal: http://people.freebsd.org/~wkoszek/patches/no-lukemftpd.patch.bz2 Just to describe -- those elements are gone: - src/libexec/lukemftpd - lukemftpd's entry in src/libexec/Makefile - src/contrib/lukemftpd - lukemftpd lines in inetd.conf(8) It survived buildworld and installworld stage. Thanks, -- Wojciech A. Koszek wkoszek@FreeBSD.org http://FreeBSD.czest.pl/dunstan/