Re: Hackathon 2005
[EMAIL PROTECTED] dixit: >Yes you're right but a "OpenHTTPD" with "OpenMOD_GZIP" and maybe IPv6 is >still missing. And maybe a OpenSQUID... :-))) >Just jokingoO(But httpD improvements would be realy cool. :) ) $ uname -a OpenBSD jiyu.gnook.org 3.7 GENERIC#97 i386 Doing a $ cvs -qz1 -d [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvs co -PA src/usr.sbin/httpd then removing "--enable-rule=EXPAT" from Makefile.bsd-wrapper at least gives a httpd mixture from OpenBSD and KAME which compiles (I didn't try if it works, but it should). It's got good IPv6 support, one of the modules in ports needs fixing (IIRC mod_perl), and vhosts are questionable (didn't work with wildcards, only per IP). Fup2p since it's going off-topic. //mirabile -- Hey, I just realized that OpenBSD CDs are $45. Any chance I could get you to update your sig? -- Steve Shockley after reading my previous signature
Re: Hackathon 2005
On 2005-05-03, at 2:12 PM, Sean Brown wrote: be more to your liking? OpenOpenWall perhaps? OpenLinux? ^ Careful. A very vomit worthy company has a trademark on that one... http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=70727 Although, maybe not for long... http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SCOX&t=5y&l=off&z=l&q=l&c= Shane
Re: Hackathon 2005
On Monday, May 2, Sean Brown wrote: > > Is that for the stupid Open* suggestion or the fact it was Bash? Would > OpenKDE be more to your liking? OpenOpenWall perhaps? OpenLinux? Uuuggghhh!!! Ok, I just want to drink beer and hack. The rest will take care of itself. --Toby.
Re: Hackathon 2005
> > > I'm looking forward to OpenBash > > > > Why do you want every OpenBSD developer to puke? > > > > Miod > Is that for the stupid Open* suggestion or the fact it was Bash? The latter. Miod
Re: Hackathon 2005
On May 1, 2005 3:31 pm, Miod Vallat wrote: > > I'm looking forward to OpenBash > > Why do you want every OpenBSD developer to puke? > > Miod Is that for the stupid Open* suggestion or the fact it was Bash? Would OpenKDE be more to your liking? OpenOpenWall perhaps? OpenLinux?
Re: Hackathon 2005
Steve Shockley wrote: Sean Brown wrote: I'm looking forward to OpenBash If you keep saying things like that, Theo's going to change the default shell back to csh. what is this attraction to csh anyway? cheers, kim -- Kim Hawtin : IT Systems Administrator Ratbag : Level 8 - 63 Pirie Street Adelaide SA 5000 Australia Ph +61 882 235 830 : Fx +61 882 235 746 khawtin at ratbaggames dot com This email is confidential for the addressee only and is subject to copyright where applicable.
Re: Hackathon 2005
Sean Brown wrote: > I'm looking forward to OpenBash Do you realize that on my only Linux machine I don't even have bash installed. I replaced /bin/sh with ash and I use zsh for my shell. bash for Linux is like Internet Explorer for windows. It comes preinstalled so everyone uses it and doesn't bother to look at alternatives, simply because it `already works.' # Han
Re: Hackathon 2005
> Sean Brown wrote: >>I'm looking forward to OpenBash > > They already have it, it's called ksh. Yes you're right but a "OpenHTTPD" with "OpenMOD_GZIP" and maybe IPv6 is still missing. And maybe a OpenSQUID... :-))) Just jokingoO(But httpD improvements would be realy cool. :) ) Kind regards, Sebastian
Re: Hackathon 2005
Sean Brown wrote: I'm looking forward to OpenBash They already have it, it's called ksh. _ Take charge with a pop-up guard built on patented Microsoft. SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN. Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
Re: Hackathon 2005
Thierry Deval wrote: On May 1, 2005, at 23:31, Miod Vallat wrote: I'm looking forward to OpenBash I think they should write the ultimate virus! Take out Windows completely! Think of it!; it would be the big bang all over again! Alternately, I could live with mount_smbfs (puts on flame retardant suit)
Re: Hackathon 2005
Sean Brown wrote: I'm looking forward to OpenBash If you keep saying things like that, Theo's going to change the default shell back to csh.
Re: Hackathon 2005
On May 1, 2005, at 23:31, Miod Vallat wrote: I'm looking forward to OpenBash Why do you want every OpenBSD developer to puke? Jeez, I didn't read that ! And it is indeed MY feeling. :p
Re: Hackathon 2005
> I'm looking forward to OpenBash > Why do you want every OpenBSD developer to puke? Miod
Re: Hackathon 2005
On May 1, 2005 2:11 pm, Otto Moerbeek wrote: > On Sun, 1 May 2005, Ben Goren wrote: > > I did *not* say that I expected a Sendmail replacement any time > > soon--quite the opposite. Let me put a definite limit on this: I'd bet > > no more than (a modest) lunch, and only on the condition that I already > > happened to be in the same city when the bet came due, that, the next > > time we see an OpenWHATEVER, it's an OpenSMTPD. We may not ever see > > another OpenWHATEVER, though that bunch just has too much fun hacking > > for me to imagine that. There may well be something like OpenNTPD that > > somebody like Henning is quietly working on--and, in fact, this is more > > likely to be the case than any particular specific thing. > > To show you the value of this kind of speculations, I'm going to "rebrand" > dc(1) and bc(1) to OpenDC and OpenBC. And I'll wait with that until the > moment we're in the same town. > > -Otto I'm looking forward to OpenBash
Re: Hackathon 2005
Sorry If I didn't read to well, but when exactly is the hackaton planned? I always like to have my personal hackaton at the same time and I always watch every CVS commit. Wijnand
Re: Hackathon 2005
On Sun, 1 May 2005, Ben Goren wrote: > I did *not* say that I expected a Sendmail replacement any time > soon--quite the opposite. Let me put a definite limit on this: I'd bet > no more than (a modest) lunch, and only on the condition that I already > happened to be in the same city when the bet came due, that, the next > time we see an OpenWHATEVER, it's an OpenSMTPD. We may not ever see > another OpenWHATEVER, though that bunch just has too much fun hacking > for me to imagine that. There may well be something like OpenNTPD that > somebody like Henning is quietly working on--and, in fact, this is more > likely to be the case than any particular specific thing. To show you the value of this kind of speculations, I'm going to "rebrand" dc(1) and bc(1) to OpenDC and OpenBC. And I'll wait with that until the moment we're in the same town. -Otto
Re: Hackathon 2005
On 2005 Apr 30, at 5:22 PM, Jeff Bachtel wrote: > On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 02:30:28PM -0700, Ben Goren wrote: >> As much as I'm sure Theo would love to get rid of gcc and >> friends...damn, that's a big undertaking. I don't think it's the sort >> of thing that would happen at a hackathon. If I had to guess, it'd be >> made the main point of some future release, with little other >> development. You know, the sort of thing that takes up lots of long >> winter nights. It's not likely to be fun, and I get the impression >> that >> hackathons are supposed to be fun. > > *blink* tech@ bitching aside, the GNU gcc project puts a HUGE amount > of effort into improving their compiler. Forking it would have every > chance of leading to stagnation in the OpenBSD project as processors > and optimizations evolve. There are lots of things I don't know about the inner workings of OpenBSD. Of this, though I *am* sure: OpenBSD will never ``fork'' gcc. Oh, sure, there will probably always be OpenBSD-specific patches against it, or they may lag behind the current version, or what-not. But a fork? I just can't imagine it. Well, *maybe* if they moved gcc to this new version of the GPL everybody is talking about, but I can't really imagine that happening, either. In this distant, dim future I'm envisioning as gcc-less, I would expect Theo to either adopt TenDRA or roll his own compiler from scratch. I have no clue if TenDRA is anywhere close to being up to the task, and writing one's own is quite obviously about as mammoth a project as one could undertake. Notice how I started this paragraph with ``distant, dim future''? All in all, this topic is about as meaningful as us discussing petroleum replacements. Everybody knows that it'll have to happen some day, and perhaps even sooner than anybody really wants--though most would also be overjoyed to wave a magic wand and be done with it. There's a lot of pain between here and there and, while of utmost importance, it's also (currently) about as far from urgent as one can get. (Some day it will be very urgent, unless we discover that magic wand first.) >> This is pure WAG speculation, but I'd guess that the next OpenD >> would be OpenSMTPD [. . . .] > > Replacing Sendmail outright seems iffy at best. Search archives for > when this has been mentioned in the past, and you will get "no way in > hell" replies from Theo. Auditing and partitioning it, maybe. Again, you twist my words, and Theo's too, this time. I did *not* say that I expected a Sendmail replacement any time soon--quite the opposite. Let me put a definite limit on this: I'd bet no more than (a modest) lunch, and only on the condition that I already happened to be in the same city when the bet came due, that, the next time we see an OpenWHATEVER, it's an OpenSMTPD. We may not ever see another OpenWHATEVER, though that bunch just has too much fun hacking for me to imagine that. There may well be something like OpenNTPD that somebody like Henning is quietly working on--and, in fact, this is more likely to be the case than any particular specific thing. Yes, Theo has been quite vociferous about Sendmail replacements. You'll note, however, that in every one of those threads, Theo is responding to people demanding that he replace Sendmail with some specific other MTA. There is no way in hell that Qmail, for example, will ever go in OpenBSD. You'll also note that Theo has never said one word about writing his own MTA. Let me stress that: Theo has been ABSOLUTELY SILENT. He has said NOT ONE WORD. I would be damned surprised if he ever did--unless, of course, it was to say, ``Hey guys, foo@ has done some great work in writing OpenSMTPD for us. Grab a snapshot and help test it for us.'' All the speculation here is MINE. I'm doing a bit of Kremlinology, is all. It doesn't take a genius to notice all of Sendmail's warts. Of the items remaining in /usr/src/gnu, it's got the most license problems. In the past, warty code with undesirable licenses has been a prime target for replacement. All I'm really saying is that Sendmail is the wartiest piece of code left with a problematic license. And why should *you* care whether or not any of this ``scales.'' Managing the project is Theo's worry, not yours, and he's shown himself to be damned capable of doing so. Besides, which do you think is easier: maintaining your own code that you know better than anybody else, or maintaining somebody else's code that you have to work to figure out? And I know from personal experience that, when you get the code right in the first place, you don't have to do anywhere near as much to maintain it. Cheers, b& P.S. As long as we're talking about elephants in the room, it's worth mentioning Perl. Huge code, and all those modules written by everybody and his sister. I don't know which would be worse: writing an OpenPERL or writing C replacements for all that incredible stuff Espie's done to
Re: Hackathon 2005
A few promissing tasks indeed, What ever endeavours you may embark on during the Hackathon, I hope you find a nice beer buzz and as Jan Izary put it; > Beyond that we can hope that someone has > a moment of clarity and comes up with > another sweet addition like spamd. > If I wasn't sure developers had already said > they're not going to; I'd have thought httpd > or cc replacements. On 5/1/05, Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> track and keep up to date another openbsd patch that sendmail won't > > > >> integrate into their tree. We already know that Postfix and qmail > > > >> don't > > > > > Sorry for not being clear, but I was using it as an example. There are > > > many cases of organizations not accepting patches from the openbsd team, > > > apache being one of the more famous examples. There are plenty of > > > complaints for these in the archives. > > > > Then please choose more appropriate examples or make clear that > > your "example" was completely fictious. sendmail.org is NOT one of > > those "organizations not accepting patches from the openbsd team". > > Don't waste your time with this guy, Claus. > > It's just the regular kook who acts like he is informed when he is not.
Re: Hackathon 2005
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 :) Hah. On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 20:12:39 -0700 Raymond Lillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Dear auto... > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Theo, >> >> Perhaps your a bit "ininformed" yourself.. unless there is some >> weird canadian/US translation going on here, I am pretty sure >that >> the word you were looking for was infact, "uninformed". :) > >Nor is there any such word as "infact". :( > >Ray > >> >> On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:03:01 -0700 Theo de Raadt >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I don't have any point to make on the value of these projects, however "does this scale?" >>> >>>How does it scale that we have to listen to your ininformed >>>gibberish day in day out? >> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- >> Note: This signature can be verified at >https://www.hushtools.com/verify >> Version: Hush 2.4 >> >> >wkYEARECAAYFAkJ0QpMACgkQSNwPY+UhpH8VCQCgtEFtFT8CsixwkyM+TVyMjjwAB2M >A >> oK4YgmqtA19bSPgqn9bjYSsZeauM >> =EYkF >> -END PGP SIGNATURE- >> >> >> >> >> Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get >> secure FREE email: http://www.hushmail.com/?l=2 >> >> Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger >> http://www.hushmail.com/services-messenger?l=434 >> >> Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate >Program: >> http://www.hushmail.com/about-affiliate?l=427 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 2.4 wkYEARECAAYFAkJ0W6AACgkQSNwPY+UhpH+zOACfZnqFTTVfcod5S+Vq1iik90KTYkgA oIDQtdDSvU4gyCy/0LtT4OdUV2qr =K+7m -END PGP SIGNATURE- Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get secure FREE email: http://www.hushmail.com/?l=2 Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger http://www.hushmail.com/services-messenger?l=434 Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate Program: http://www.hushmail.com/about-affiliate?l=427
Re: Hackathon 2005
There is a word "uninformed". I do not think that Theo intended to use that word. "Disinformed" and "Misinformed" are closer but do not convey the intent. Words enter the language because they are used in a context which makes their meaning rather obvious and other words fail to express correctly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 9:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Hackathon 2005 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Theo, Perhaps your a bit "ininformed" yourself.. unless there is some weird canadian/US translation going on here, I am pretty sure that the word you were looking for was infact, "uninformed". :) On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:03:01 -0700 Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I don't have any point to make on the value of these >> projects, however "does this scale?" > >How does it scale that we have to listen to your ininformed >gibberish day in day out? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 2.4 wkYEARECAAYFAkJ0QpMACgkQSNwPY+UhpH8VCQCgtEFtFT8CsixwkyM+TVyMjjwAB2MA oK4YgmqtA19bSPgqn9bjYSsZeauM =EYkF -END PGP SIGNATURE- Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get secure FREE email: http://www.hushmail.com/?l=2 Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger http://www.hushmail.com/services-messenger?l=434 Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate Program: http://www.hushmail.com/about-affiliate?l=427
Re: Hackathon 2005
Perhaps your a bit "ininformed" yourself.. unless there is some weird canadian/US translation going on here, I am pretty sure that the word you were looking for was infact, "uninformed". :) Oh shit! Theo didn't proof read his e-mail! The two keys are right next to each other man, no need to bug him about a typo. Moving on, I highly doubt there will be anyone trying to make a new cc, httpd or mta for a while, the current ones work well enough without causing problems. The complaints with them have mostly been dealt with already by devs (at least, the complaints we get to see online). Though I do see the compiler coming up more as gcc drops older platforms in newer versions. I also have to agree with Adam regarding things like OpenNTPd, when you want to fix a tool up there comes a point at which the amount of work involved you may as well remake the tool. And once the tool is made, there isn't a huge amount of work involved in maintaining it. You can either improve the squalid shanty or tear it down and make a house worth living in. _ Take advantage of powerful junk e-mail filters built on patented Microsoft. SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN. Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
Re: Hackathon 2005
Dear auto... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Theo, Perhaps your a bit "ininformed" yourself.. unless there is some weird canadian/US translation going on here, I am pretty sure that the word you were looking for was infact, "uninformed". :) Nor is there any such word as "infact". :( Ray On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:03:01 -0700 Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't have any point to make on the value of these projects, however "does this scale?" How does it scale that we have to listen to your ininformed gibberish day in day out? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 2.4 wkYEARECAAYFAkJ0QpMACgkQSNwPY+UhpH8VCQCgtEFtFT8CsixwkyM+TVyMjjwAB2MA oK4YgmqtA19bSPgqn9bjYSsZeauM =EYkF -END PGP SIGNATURE- Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get secure FREE email: http://www.hushmail.com/?l=2 Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger http://www.hushmail.com/services-messenger?l=434 Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate Program: http://www.hushmail.com/about-affiliate?l=427
Re: Hackathon 2005
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Theo, Perhaps your a bit "ininformed" yourself.. unless there is some weird canadian/US translation going on here, I am pretty sure that the word you were looking for was infact, "uninformed". :) On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:03:01 -0700 Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I don't have any point to make on the value of these >> projects, however "does this scale?" > >How does it scale that we have to listen to your ininformed >gibberish day in day out? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 2.4 wkYEARECAAYFAkJ0QpMACgkQSNwPY+UhpH8VCQCgtEFtFT8CsixwkyM+TVyMjjwAB2MA oK4YgmqtA19bSPgqn9bjYSsZeauM =EYkF -END PGP SIGNATURE- Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get secure FREE email: http://www.hushmail.com/?l=2 Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger http://www.hushmail.com/services-messenger?l=434 Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate Program: http://www.hushmail.com/about-affiliate?l=427
Re: Hackathon 2005
> > >> track and keep up to date another openbsd patch that sendmail won't > > >> integrate into their tree. We already know that Postfix and qmail don't > > > Sorry for not being clear, but I was using it as an example. There are > > many cases of organizations not accepting patches from the openbsd team, > > apache being one of the more famous examples. There are plenty of > > complaints for these in the archives. > > Then please choose more appropriate examples or make clear that > your "example" was completely fictious. sendmail.org is NOT one of > those "organizations not accepting patches from the openbsd team". Don't waste your time with this guy, Claus. It's just the regular kook who acts like he is informed when he is not.
Re: Hackathon 2005
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2005, Christopher Hylarides wrote: >> An OpenSMTPd would surprise me, but it doesn't mean that as we write, >> some >> OpenBSD developer isn't just about to say "that does it!" with having to >> track and keep up to date another openbsd patch that sendmail won't >> integrate into their tree. We already know that Postfix and qmail don't >> meet the reqs for replacement. > > Please tell us which patch from OpenBSD was not integrated by > sendmail. It seems you know more about that than I do. Sorry for not being clear, but I was using it as an example. There are many cases of organizations not accepting patches from the openbsd team, apache being one of the more famous examples. There are plenty of complaints for these in the archives.
Re: Hackathon 2005
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005, Christopher Hylarides wrote: > >> track and keep up to date another openbsd patch that sendmail won't > >> integrate into their tree. We already know that Postfix and qmail don't > Sorry for not being clear, but I was using it as an example. There are > many cases of organizations not accepting patches from the openbsd team, > apache being one of the more famous examples. There are plenty of > complaints for these in the archives. Then please choose more appropriate examples or make clear that your "example" was completely fictious. sendmail.org is NOT one of those "organizations not accepting patches from the openbsd team".
Re: Hackathon 2005
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005, Christopher Hylarides wrote: > An OpenSMTPd would surprise me, but it doesn't mean that as we write, some > OpenBSD developer isn't just about to say "that does it!" with having to > track and keep up to date another openbsd patch that sendmail won't > integrate into their tree. We already know that Postfix and qmail don't > meet the reqs for replacement. Please tell us which patch from OpenBSD was not integrated by sendmail. It seems you know more about that than I do.
Re: Hackathon 2005
> While I'm not a developer, I do beleive it scales reasonably well writing > their own implementations. Scaling isn't really our concern; I barely know what the word means. There is one group of people who we do know scales. Whiners. They scale really well.
Re: Hackathon 2005
> I don't have any point to make on the value of these > projects, however "does this scale?" How does it scale that we have to listen to your ininformed gibberish day in day out?
Re: Hackathon 2005
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 02:30:28PM -0700, Ben Goren wrote: > BTW, I just checked out the OpenCVS page. You know, it used to be that > people would join a project and commit fixes or enhancements, rather > than fork first and ask questions later. Is this really the best use > of developer resources? There are now OpenBSD developers responsible > for OpenSSH (which was needed, due to licensing issues), pf (some > licensing issues, perceived lack of acceptance of patches by > upstream), OpenBGPd (perceived inability to patch another project into > useability with less effort than new codebase took) and OpenNTPd (lack > of desire to send ntp4 patches upstream? Easier to write a whole new > project?). I don't have any point to make on the value of these > projects, however "does this scale?" The developers (almost) all volunteer their time to write good software. They all want a complete system that runs well out of the box. Keeping track of patches from openbsd that some organizations add to their base and others don't has probably become more burdensome than writing their own implementations that they know exactly how they run. As well, there are licensing issues that you mention. They COULD have improved zebra, but it's GPL, and wouldn't meet the freedom reqs for being in the base. An OpenSMTPd would surprise me, but it doesn't mean that as we write, some OpenBSD developer isn't just about to say "that does it!" with having to track and keep up to date another openbsd patch that sendmail won't integrate into their tree. We already know that Postfix and qmail don't meet the reqs for replacement. While I'm not a developer, I do beleive it scales reasonably well writing their own implementations. They have to test and maintain everything in the base, anyways. Many peices of software need to be well designed to take advantage of the more recent new security features of OpenBSD. Most of the work is probably initially getting everything up to speed and after about a year, the software is stable enough that serious updates are fewer and farer in between.
Re: Hackathon 2005
On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:22:48 -0500 Jeff Bachtel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > BTW, I just checked out the OpenCVS page. You know, it used to be that > people would join a project and commit fixes or enhancements, rather > than fork first and ask questions later. Is this really the best use > of developer resources? There are now OpenBSD developers responsible > for OpenSSH (which was needed, due to licensing issues), pf (some > licensing issues, perceived lack of acceptance of patches by > upstream), OpenBGPd (perceived inability to patch another project into > useability with less effort than new codebase took) and OpenNTPd (lack > of desire to send ntp4 patches upstream? Easier to write a whole new > project?). I don't have any point to make on the value of these > projects, however "does this scale?" How much work has gone into openntpd since it was "finished"? Most of the things you mentioned don't really need tons of ongoing development. I'm amazed that you think replacing shitty software with good software is a bad idea, and that trying to polish turds would be better. Adam
Re: Hackathon 2005
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 02:30:28PM -0700, Ben Goren wrote: > As much as I'm sure Theo would love to get rid of gcc and > friends...damn, that's a big undertaking. I don't think it's the sort > of thing that would happen at a hackathon. If I had to guess, it'd be > made the main point of some future release, with little other > development. You know, the sort of thing that takes up lots of long > winter nights. It's not likely to be fun, and I get the impression that > hackathons are supposed to be fun. *blink* tech@ bitching aside, the GNU gcc project puts a HUGE amount of effort into improving their compiler. Forking it would have every chance of leading to stagnation in the OpenBSD project as processors and optimizations evolve. > This is pure WAG speculation, but I'd guess that the next OpenD > would be OpenSMTPD. Look through /usr/src/gnu and, aside from the > toolchain and Perl, it's the most glaring inclusion (especially with > the advent of OpenCVS). Consider what hell Sendmail is to configure (m4 > notwithstanding) and imagine a mail daemon as easy to set up and > maintain as pf, OpenNTPD, OpenSSH, and the like and it's easy to get > excited just thinking about it. When you consider that all the spamd > stuff would certainly be very well integrated...it makes one wish one > could shut up and hack. Replacing Sendmail outright seems iffy at best. Search archives for when this has been mentioned in the past, and you will get "no way in hell" replies from Theo. Auditing and partitioning it, maybe. BTW, I just checked out the OpenCVS page. You know, it used to be that people would join a project and commit fixes or enhancements, rather than fork first and ask questions later. Is this really the best use of developer resources? There are now OpenBSD developers responsible for OpenSSH (which was needed, due to licensing issues), pf (some licensing issues, perceived lack of acceptance of patches by upstream), OpenBGPd (perceived inability to patch another project into useability with less effort than new codebase took) and OpenNTPd (lack of desire to send ntp4 patches upstream? Easier to write a whole new project?). I don't have any point to make on the value of these projects, however "does this scale?" jeff
