From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 11 04:08:29 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEE9516A4CE for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 04:08:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from core.zp.ua (core.zp.ua [193.108.112.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1BCB43D1D for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 04:08:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from oleg@core.zp.ua) Received: from core.zp.ua (oleg@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core.zp.ua with ESMTPœ id i1BC8Pae069469 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:08:25 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from oleg@core.zp.ua)œ Received: (from oleg@localhost) by core.zp.ua id i1BC8Pum069468 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:08:25 +0200 (EET) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:08:25 +0200 From: "Oleg V. Naumann" To: FreeBSD Current Message-ID: <20040211120825.GE58666@core.zp.ua> Mail-Followup-To: FreeBSD Current References: <20040211033938.DCF1843D1D@mx1.FreeBSD.org> <20040211035148.GA46147@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040211074411.GA58666@core.zp.ua> <20040211033625.E91658@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040211033625.E91658@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: uucp X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 12:08:30 -0000 On Wed, Feb 11, 2004 at 04:12:01AM -0500, Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Oleg V. Naumann wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 07:51:48PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 07:39:38PM -0800, Randy Bush wrote: > > > > i know uucp went somewhere strange in -current, but i can not > > > > find it in the source tree or in ports. and if i search for > > > > it, i get no useful results (though 'uucp' gets me many hits > > > > none of which contain 'uucp'). > > > > > > /usr/ports/net/freebsd-uucp > > > > Yes, this is in the ports tree for CURRENT now. But can anybody > > explain me, why shell for the 'uucp' user in CURRENT still points > > to the '/usr/libexec/uucp/uucico' instead > > '/usr/local/libexec/uucp/uucico', where uucico lives now? > > This could only reflect on the number of people that actively use UUCP > with FreeBSD CURRENT in the year 2004. > > > >From my point of view there is three things, why this is bogus: > > 1. After upgrade from STABLE shell will be points to the wrong binary > > 2. This is real pain all these cries from mergemaster about differences > > in the master.passwd > > You're going to be prompted to merge your /etc/passwd file nonetheless. > We've dropped the 'xten' user since STABLE, for example. > > > 3. In the clean CURRENT shell for the uucp user points with finger > > to the sky. > > On a clean (w/o uucp) CURRENT install, how is that any different than > pointing to a non-existant /usr/local/libexec/uucp/uucico because the port > isn't installed? > > > But why we doesn't have wrapper for the uucico like /usr/bin/perl for > > perl? Looks like this will be much better solution instead fixing shell > > for the uucp user. > > A correct fix would be to change the default shell for the user under > CURRENT. One could argue that an even more correct fix would be to remove > the user altogether and have the port create the user on the install make > target with the right login shell. This would entail changing the owner of > the /dev/cua* category of serial character devices, but it's certainly > doable. It looks like histe^Horical reasons prevents this change. But, uucp are very useful in some environments, so fixing this issues will be very pleasant. > > Regards, > Andy > > > Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant > > > Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/ > > -- NO37-RIPE