Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Ivan Voras 
On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote:

> (and is GPL btw)

Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has
proper crypto signing using GPG:

http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated.3F




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Volodymyr Kostyrko 

19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote:

On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote:


(and is GPL btw)


Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has
proper crypto signing using GPG:

http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated.3F


:%s/BSD/LGP/

http://mercurial.selenic.com/about/

--
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Mehmet Erol Sanliturk 
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Ivan Voras  wrote:

> On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote:
>
> > (and is GPL btw)
>
> Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has
> proper crypto signing using GPG:
>
>
> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated.3F
>
>
>

http://selenic.com/repo/hg/file/fd903f89e42b
http://selenic.com/repo/hg/file/fd903f89e42b/COPYING
"
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
  Version 2, June
1991

 
"

In their repository , it is GPL v2 .

Is there any other place which specifies its license as BSDL ?


Thank you very much .

Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Ivan Voras 
On 19/11/2012 13:47, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
> 19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote:
>>
>>> (and is GPL btw)
>>
>> Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has
>> proper crypto signing using GPG:
>>
>> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated.3F
> 
> :%s/BSD/GPL/
> 
> http://mercurial.selenic.com/about/

:(




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Andriy Gapon 
on 18/11/2012 16:17 Chris Rees said the following:
> On 18 November 2012 14:04, Adrian Chadd  wrote:
>> On 18 November 2012 02:48, Andriy Gapon  wrote:
>>
>>> What you describe is not a workflow issue, but a local development
>>> environment(s) setup issue.
>>
>> Which is a workflow issue.
>>
>> I mean, we could bang heads on semantics for hours on end, or we can
>> realise that git isn't a magic bullet for FreeBSD development.
> 
> Also... did I mention git is GPL?

Yes, you did, twice now.
I do not see any relevance of Git license to FreeBSD's choice of SCM solution.
But, of course, I am not:
a) a zealot
b) proposing Git (or Subversion, or Mercurial) to be bundled with a base system


-- 
Andriy Gapon
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Chris Rees 
On 19 Nov 2012 13:05, "Andriy Gapon"  wrote:
>
> on 18/11/2012 16:17 Chris Rees said the following:
> > On 18 November 2012 14:04, Adrian Chadd  wrote:
> >> On 18 November 2012 02:48, Andriy Gapon  wrote:
> >>
> >>> What you describe is not a workflow issue, but a local development
> >>> environment(s) setup issue.
> >>
> >> Which is a workflow issue.
> >>
> >> I mean, we could bang heads on semantics for hours on end, or we can
> >> realise that git isn't a magic bullet for FreeBSD development.
> >
> > Also... did I mention git is GPL?
>
> Yes, you did, twice now.
> I do not see any relevance of Git license to FreeBSD's choice of SCM
solution.
> But, of course, I am not:
> a) a zealot
> b) proposing Git (or Subversion, or Mercurial) to be bundled with a base
system

I'm disappointed that you choose to call me a zealot- this is a valid
concern, especially since we're trying to move away from GPL stuff.
Whether it's in base or not, you'd still be forcing me to install it for
development.  Why are people so dismissive of this point?

Chris
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Andriy Gapon 
on 19/11/2012 03:53 Nathan Whitehorn said the following:
> git would be a huge step backward from svn for the central repo in lots of 
> ways.

Dramatic statements ("huge", "lots") require dramatic evidence.

> Besides being (in my experience) extremely fragile and error-prone and the

Ditto ("extremely").

> issues of workflow that have been brought up, the loss of monotonic revision
> numbers is a really major problem.

Monotonic revision numbers are nice to have, but again, are they really of that
major importance?

> Switching SCMs as a result of a security
> problem is also an action totally disproportionate with the issue that should
> not be made in a panic. Having more [cryptographic] verifiability in the 
> release
> process is a good thing; it is not strictly related to the choice of version
> control system.

With this part I entirely agree.

-- 
Andriy Gapon
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Andriy Gapon 
on 19/11/2012 15:08 Chris Rees said the following:
> 
> On 19 Nov 2012 13:05, "Andriy Gapon"  >
> wrote:
>>
>> on 18/11/2012 16:17 Chris Rees said the following:
>> > On 18 November 2012 14:04, Adrian Chadd  > wrote:
>> >> On 18 November 2012 02:48, Andriy Gapon  > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> What you describe is not a workflow issue, but a local development
>> >>> environment(s) setup issue.
>> >>
>> >> Which is a workflow issue.
>> >>
>> >> I mean, we could bang heads on semantics for hours on end, or we can
>> >> realise that git isn't a magic bullet for FreeBSD development.
>> >
>> > Also... did I mention git is GPL?
>>
>> Yes, you did, twice now.
>> I do not see any relevance of Git license to FreeBSD's choice of SCM 
>> solution.
>> But, of course, I am not:
>> a) a zealot
>> b) proposing Git (or Subversion, or Mercurial) to be bundled with a base 
>> system
> 
> I'm disappointed that you choose to call me a zealot- this is a valid concern,
> especially since we're trying to move away from GPL stuff.  Whether it's in 
> base
> or not, you'd still be forcing me to install it for development.  Why are 
> people
> so dismissive of this point?

a. I haven't called you a zealot
b. You now _sound_ like a zealot if even just installing GPL-licensed software
on your local/private machine sounds like a problem to you

-- 
Andriy Gapon
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Mehmet Erol Sanliturk 
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 5:10 AM, C. P. Ghost  wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Volodymyr Kostyrko 
> wrote:
> > 19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote:
> >>
> >> On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote:
> >>
> >>> (and is GPL btw)
> >>
> >>
> >> Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has
> >> proper crypto signing using GPG:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated.3F
> >
> >
> > :%s/BSD/LGP/
> >
> > http://mercurial.selenic.com/about/
>
> Even if it was BSD licensed, Mercurial has a huge dependency:
> Python; and Git is Perl-based. So neither of them is ideal, IMHO.
> If at all, we'd need a lean and mean distributed SCM program
> like Mercurial or Git, but written in C that we could add to base.
> Any volunteers?
>
> -cpghost.
>
> --
> Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
>



http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/License
http://selenic.com/hg/file/tip/COPYING
http://mercurial.selenic.com/about/


"Mercurial is free software licensed under the terms of the GNU General
Public License Version 2  or any
later version."

No one of them above mentions "BSD license" , or "dual license" , etc.


Thank you very much .

Mehmet Erol Sanliturk



Similar projects
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread C. P. Ghost 
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Volodymyr Kostyrko  wrote:
> 19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote:
>>
>> On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote:
>>
>>> (and is GPL btw)
>>
>>
>> Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has
>> proper crypto signing using GPG:
>>
>>
>> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated.3F
>
>
> :%s/BSD/LGP/
>
> http://mercurial.selenic.com/about/

Even if it was BSD licensed, Mercurial has a huge dependency:
Python; and Git is Perl-based. So neither of them is ideal, IMHO.
If at all, we'd need a lean and mean distributed SCM program
like Mercurial or Git, but written in C that we could add to base.
Any volunteers?

-cpghost.

-- 
Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Alexander Yerenkow 
http://www.fossil-scm.org/

I'm not fossil user, but it's BSD licensed in written in C.
Baptise Daroussin probably could tell us more about fossil pro and cons.


-- 
Regards,
Alexander Yerenkow
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Ollivier Robert 
According to C. P. Ghost on Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 02:10:40PM +0100:
> Even if it was BSD licensed, Mercurial has a huge dependency:
> Python; 



> and Git is Perl-based. So neither of them is ideal, IMHO.

Nope, git is almost all C even though some other tools relying on git are in 
Perl.

> If at all, we'd need a lean and mean distributed SCM program
> like Mercurial or Git, but written in C that we could add to base.
> Any volunteers?

We don't have svn in base either.  Your point?

-- 
Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- robe...@keltia.net
In memoriam to Ondine, our 2nd child: http://ondine.keltia.net/

___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Using PC-Sysinstall for automated network installs of FreeBSD

2012-11-19 Thread Mark Saad 

On Nov 17, 2012, at 12:19 AM, Warren Block  wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote:
> 
>> On Nov 16, 2012, at 8:44 PM, Warren Block  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Warren Block wrote:
>>> 
 Trying to start this from SYSLINUX almost works.  My menu config just does
>>> 
>>> Actually, it does work on a real machine.  It stalls on a VirtualBox VM 
>>> during or after the NFS root mount.
>> 
>> Strange , I will test it on virtualbox when I get some time next week . I 
>> did a lot of the testing initially on VMware esxi 4.0 and I did not have any 
>> issues related to VM stuff . What version of vbox did you use ? What network 
>> interface choice did you use in vbox ?
> 
> VirtualBox 4.1.22, FreeBSD 9-stable amd64 host.  Only the "PCnet-FAST III 
> (Am79C973)" can pxe-boot, and only in bridged mode.

Does this nic pxe boot other versions of FreeBSD ?  Isn't there a way to make 
it think it has a intel em nic?

---
Mark saad | mark.s...@longcount.org

___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Using PC-Sysinstall for automated network installs of FreeBSD

2012-11-19 Thread Warren Block 

On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote:



On Nov 17, 2012, at 12:19 AM, Warren Block  wrote:


On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote:


On Nov 16, 2012, at 8:44 PM, Warren Block  wrote:


On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Warren Block wrote:


Trying to start this from SYSLINUX almost works.  My menu config just does


Actually, it does work on a real machine.  It stalls on a VirtualBox VM during 
or after the NFS root mount.


Strange , I will test it on virtualbox when I get some time next week . I did a 
lot of the testing initially on VMware esxi 4.0 and I did not have any issues 
related to VM stuff . What version of vbox did you use ? What network interface 
choice did you use in vbox ?


VirtualBox 4.1.22, FreeBSD 9-stable amd64 host.  Only the "PCnet-FAST III 
(Am79C973)" can pxe-boot, and only in bridged mode.


Does this nic pxe boot other versions of FreeBSD ?


I have not tried anything other than 9.x, will give 8.x a try when 
possible.



Isn't there a way to make it think it has a intel em nic?


Yes, but the emulated Intel does not have a boot ROM.  There are methods 
to add a boot ROM, but my attempts at that were not successful and I 
have not gotten back to it.

___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

FreeBSD's SCM periodic bikeshed

2012-11-19 Thread Joan Picanyol i Puig 
[security@ and questions@ dropped]

* Alexander Yerenkow  [20121119 14:40]:
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/
> 
> I'm not fossil user, but it's BSD licensed in written in C.
> Baptise Daroussin probably could tell us more about fossil pro and cons.

Jörg Sonnenberger has been testing it on NetBSD.

http://www.sonnenberger.org/2010/10/24/fossil-and-netbsd/
http://blog.netbsd.org/tnf/entry/fossil_and_git_mirrors_of

qvb
--
pica
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Using PC-Sysinstall for automated network installs of FreeBSD

2012-11-19 Thread Sam Fourman Jr. 
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Warren Block  wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote:
>
>  Useful paths on /export, /export/install/freebsd/9.1/{**i386,amd64}
>> this is the contents of the install media rsync'd to a local filesystem
>>
>
> Do you have a way to choose either i386 or amd64 installs?
>
>
>  5 I changed my rc.conf to start a simple shell script and not the
>> bsdinstall bits
>>
>
> Maybe you mean "/etc/rc.local" there?
>
>
>  export TERM=vt220
>>
>> echo "o  PC-SYSINSTALL "
>> exec /conf/picker.sh
>>
>
this is a interesting place to start on a custom USB installer, as i Want
to learn more about how make release works, where would I look or rather
what would I modify to get make release generate a larger memstick image,
so that it has a few mb of free space on the image..



> --
>

Sam Fourman Jr.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Zach Leslie 
> There's a git repository. It's public. You can look at what goes into
> the FreeBSD git clone to get your assurance that things aren't being
> snuck in. People are using it, right now.

I've always been confused by this.  Which source repo is the true source
of truth?

To obtain the FreeBSD source, you can use CVS, SVN, or Git?  Do all have
the same level of support?  Are they all up to date?

> Honestly, I'd rather see subversion grow this kind of cryptographic
> signing of each commit in the short term then migrate everyone over to
> git.

How much effor would their really be involved, considering your link to
the FreeBSD source repo on github.  Converting the repos to me seems
like it would be the bulk of it, and that work is already done.  Help me
understand please.

Also, local branching and merging is amazing.

-- 
Zach
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Zach Leslie 
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/
> 
> I'm not fossil user, but it's BSD licensed in written in C.
> Baptise Daroussin probably could tell us more about fossil pro and cons.

This misses one of of the main points raised in the original post.  The
proliferation of git as a revision control system.

Also, this particular tool bails out on the unix philosophy, with its web
gui, ticket tracker etc.  Do one thing.  Do it well.

-- 
Zach
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Eitan Adler 
On 19 November 2012 22:04, Zach Leslie  wrote:
> I've always been confused by this.  Which source repo is the true source
> of truth?

This changed a few months ago when ports and doc switched.

As of now:


- SVN is *the* source of truth.

- CVS is exported from svn. It will eventually go away
- git is exported from svn. It will remain as an option for developers
(including myself).

> To obtain the FreeBSD source, you can use CVS, SVN, or Git?  Do all have
> the same level of support?  Are they all up to date?

SVN is *always* up to date.  We try really hard to keep the others up
to date, but fail at times.

> Also, local branching and merging is amazing.

+1 - but one can always use git-svn.


-- 
Eitan Adler
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"