Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 16:05:20 -0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r257696 - in head: libexec/rbootd share/man/man9 sys/compat/svr4 sys/net sys/sys Message-ID: <527AD940.7010605@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201311051718.26356.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201311051029.rA5ATmmM017799@svn.freebsd.org> <201311051447.52382.jhb@freebsd.org> <20131105204217.GK7577@FreeBSD.org> <201311051718.26356.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/5/13, 2:18 PM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:42:17 pm Gleb Smirnoff wrote: >> John, >> >> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 02:47:52PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: >> J> On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 2:29:04 pm Gleb Smirnoff wrote: >> J> > On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 11:56:09AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: >> J> > J> On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 5:29:48 am Gleb Smirnoff wrote: >> J> > J> > Author: glebius >> J> > J> > Date: Tue Nov 5 10:29:47 2013 >> J> > J> > New Revision: 257696 >> J> > J> > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/257696 >> J> > J> > >> J> > J> > Log: >> J> > J> > Drop support for historic ioctls and also undefine them, so that code >> J> > J> > that checks their presence via ifdef, won't use them. >> J> > J> >> J> > J> Most of these are COMPAT_43, but one appears to be a 9.x ioctl? If that's the >> J> > J> case it's implementation should probably stick around under appropriate >> J> > J> COMPAT_FREEBSD<x> macros. It looks like it goes all the way back to 4.4BSD, >> J> > J> so at least COMPAT_FREEBSD4 and later should define the implementation to >> J> > J> preserve ABI compat for old binaries. >> J> > >> J> > Why should we support such broken configurations as running new kernel and >> J> > ancient core base system utilities? The efforts to keep this are much more >> J> > expensive, then yields. >> J> >> J> Is this ioctl only ever used by ifconfig and not suitable for public consumption? >> J> If so, then I think removing it is fine. However, it's not clear that this is >> J> the case from the commit, and it's good to make sure it is really the case. >> J> >> J> It might be nice to hide ioctls we think are internal under some #ifdef that tools >> J> like ifconfig #define to expose them so we are more explicit about which ioctls >> J> are purely internal, etc. >> >> Well, it isn't hidden and actually some applications as zebra/quagga can use it. >> >> On previous hacking session at this area, 2 years ago, I noticed that zebra/quagga >> do use SIOCAIFADDR and it actually does better at filling sockaddrs than our >> ifconfig :) >> >> I am pretty sure that no closed source, but available to wide public, application >> that configures addresses in FreeBSD kernel exist. >> >> In case of open source applications, like zebra/quagga, supporting one major >> release behind should be enough. > Mmmm, people run older versions of binaries (even open source ones) on newer OS's > perhaps more often than you think. The COMPAT_43 stuff can be dropped certainly, > but people will almost certainly do rolling upgrades where they upgrade the OS > on their machines before they upgrade their packages. > There are people running binaries back to the 2.x days I'm sure. Personally every now and then I fire up a 1.1 jail and I'll be very sad if I can't do that any more. I don't expect ifconfig or netstat (or ps) to run, but it'd be a pitty if standard 'apps' stopped working. for a laugh you should time "make world" in such a jail.. it shows how much cost our progress comes at. Certainly, I'd like to be able to compile and package freebsd 1 or 2 based systems for very small embeded x86 based appliances.. some still exist..
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?527AD940.7010605>