Re: [HEADSUP] Deprecation of the ftp support in pkg
22 janv. 2022 08:47:57 Chris : > On 2022-01-21 23:31, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> 22 janv. 2022 08:25:47 Chris : >> On 2022-01-20 06:25, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: Hello everyone, We plan to remove the support for fetching packages over ftp for the next releases of pkg (probably 1.18) >>> Must be a stupid question. But I'll ask anyway; Why the effort to start >>> removing transports? >> Because maintaining ftp has a cost, number of line of code, user support etc. >> if you have a strong reason to use ftp which cannot be fixed by switching to any other supported protocols like ssh or http, please do share. >>> Local repos. >>> ftp(1) is cheap. Other transports are (usually) more expensive. >>> > Thanks for taking the time to reply. > >> ssh which is supported is as cheap if not cheaper. > Technically that's incorrect. But as I see you've also rejected 2 other > requests. It's > clear that this topic is not actually up for debate. So I'll say no more on > the subject. >> Bapt > -- Chris It is up for debate, I have been told we need something in base to which I replied ssh is in base, so fill that requirement, you have said it is cheap no explaining what you call cheap, I say ssh is cheap as well as in not more complicated to configure, provide a path and here we are. You asked the reason for the removal I explained them, if ftp was free of cost I won t care about keeping it. So up to now noone gave an detailed argument in favour of ftp, which ssh or other transport cannot provide as well. Bapt
Re: [HEADSUP] Deprecation of the ftp support in pkg
On 2022-01-22 00:09, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: 22 janv. 2022 08:47:57 Chris : On 2022-01-21 23:31, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: 22 janv. 2022 08:25:47 Chris : On 2022-01-20 06:25, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: Hello everyone, We plan to remove the support for fetching packages over ftp for the next releases of pkg (probably 1.18) Must be a stupid question. But I'll ask anyway; Why the effort to start removing transports? Because maintaining ftp has a cost, number of line of code, user support etc. if you have a strong reason to use ftp which cannot be fixed by switching to any other supported protocols like ssh or http, please do share. Local repos. ftp(1) is cheap. Other transports are (usually) more expensive. Thanks for taking the time to reply. ssh which is supported is as cheap if not cheaper. Technically that's incorrect. But as I see you've also rejected 2 other requests. It's clear that this topic is not actually up for debate. So I'll say no more on the subject. Bapt -- Chris It is up for debate, I have been told we need something in base to which I replied ssh is in base, so fill that requirement, you have said it is cheap no explaining what you call cheap, I say ssh is cheap as well as in not more complicated to configure, provide a path and here we are. You asked the reason for the removal I explained them, if ftp was free of cost I won t care about keeping it. So up to now noone gave an detailed argument in favour of ftp, which ssh or other transport cannot provide as well. Fair enough. Sorry if I misunderstood. I find it's less "housekeeping" to use ftp(1) setup through inetd(8) for pkg repos, than via ssh. I have no keys to care for. I am able to setup enormous intranets w/o any key exchange. ftp/inetd is in base. It seems "cheaper" both in resources as well as setup / usage. This works equally well for internets with the addition of an allow list (IP addresses). Where anything not in that list is dropped. That's my take on it. Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Bapt -- Chris 0xBDE49540.asc Description: application/pgp-keys
FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date
Dear port maintainer, The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity to check each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate, submit/commit an update. If any ports have already been updated, you can safely ignore the entry. You will not be e-mailed again for any of the port/version combinations below. Full details can be found at the following URL: http://portscout.freebsd.org/po...@freebsd.org.html Port| Current version | New version +-+ net/mpich | 3.4.3 | 4.0 +-+ textproc/templates_parser | 17.0.0 | v22.0.0 +-+ If any of the above results are invalid, please check the following page for details on how to improve portscout's detection and selection of distfiles on a per-port basis: http://portscout.freebsd.org/info/portscout-portconfig.txt Reported by:portscout!
Re: [HEADSUP] Deprecation of the ftp support in pkg
On 1/22/22 01:35, Chris wrote: On 2022-01-22 00:09, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: 22 janv. 2022 08:47:57 Chris : On 2022-01-21 23:31, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: 22 janv. 2022 08:25:47 Chris : On 2022-01-20 06:25, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: Hello everyone, We plan to remove the support for fetching packages over ftp for the next releases of pkg (probably 1.18) Must be a stupid question. But I'll ask anyway; Why the effort to start removing transports? Because maintaining ftp has a cost, number of line of code, user support etc. if you have a strong reason to use ftp which cannot be fixed by switching to any other supported protocols like ssh or http, please do share. Local repos. ftp(1) is cheap. Other transports are (usually) more expensive. Thanks for taking the time to reply. ssh which is supported is as cheap if not cheaper. Technically that's incorrect. But as I see you've also rejected 2 other requests. It's clear that this topic is not actually up for debate. So I'll say no more on the subject. Bapt -- Chris It is up for debate, I have been told we need something in base to which I replied ssh is in base, so fill that requirement, you have said it is cheap no explaining what you call cheap, I say ssh is cheap as well as in not more complicated to configure, provide a path and here we are. You asked the reason for the removal I explained them, if ftp was free of cost I won t care about keeping it. So up to now noone gave an detailed argument in favour of ftp, which ssh or other transport cannot provide as well. Fair enough. Sorry if I misunderstood. I find it's less "housekeeping" to use ftp(1) setup through inetd(8) for pkg repos, than via ssh. I have no keys to care for. I am able to setup enormous intranets w/o any key exchange. ftp/inetd is in base. It seems "cheaper" both in resources as well as setup / usage. This works equally well for internets with the addition of an allow list (IP addresses). Where anything not in that list is dropped. If you want to let it all hang out without encryption infrastructure "inside" with base facilities only, another possibility is NFSv4 with, uh, "sys" authentication. I use this to follow a monthly stable + packages full rebuild and install/upgrade. I *love* it. Server: $ grep nfs /etc/rc.conf nfs_server_enable="YES" nfs_server_flags="-u -t -n 5" nfsv4_server_enable="YES" nfsuserd_enable="YES" nfsuserd_flags="-domain pinyon.lan" nfscbd_enable="YES" $ cat /etc/exports: / -maproot=root V4: / -network 10.0.0.0/16 Client: $ grep nfs /etc/rc.conf nfs_client_enable="YES" I use autofs and the following $ cat /etc/auto_master # Automounter master map, see auto_master(5) for details. /- autofs/bruno-nfs $ cat /etc/autofs/bruno-nfs # See auto_master(5). /mnt/bruno/packages -intr,nfsv4,minorversion=1 bruno:/export/packages /usr/src -intr,nfsv4,minorversion=1 bruno:/usr/src /usr/obj -intr,nfsv4,minorversion=1 bruno:/usr/obj /usr/ports -intr,nfsv4,minorversion=1 bruno:/usr/ports NFS is not without other, possibly deal-breaking aggravations. I have found it impossible to maintain without absolute consistency of UID/GID assignments across the intranet. Yeah, no, I couldn't get nfsuserd to fix that. I also consider SPOF kerberos or building an internal TLS cert infrastructure to be absurd wastes of my unpaid finite time. People getting paid would surely do one or the other. hth, Russell That's my take on it. Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Bapt -- Chris
Re: [HEADSUP] Deprecation of the ftp support in pkg
On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 03:25:19PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: Hello everyone, We plan to remove the support for fetching packages over ftp for the next releases of pkg (probably 1.18) if you have a strong reason to use ftp which cannot be fixed by switching to any other supported protocols like ssh or http, please do share. Hi, Some places (jurastictions or companies) might not allow ssh. Others might not allow https. With variety there is choice. Is ftp a great overhead? -- J. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
