Re: faithd fcntl diff
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:54:58AM -0700, Bob Beck wrote: On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:00:08PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:05:29 -0600 From: Todd T. Fries t...@fries.net In light of nat64 in pf(4), what purpose does faithd(8) serve anymore? I played with it a bit over a decade ago, but don't recall having any use for it in the last number of years. I vote it gets tedu'ed. I fear it's too late in the game to do that now. Bring this up again after unlock. Meanwhile, perhaps that bug (if it really is a bug) should be fixed? yeah, I'd probably shy away from tedu'ing it at this late stage in the release cycle - make sure it's adequate for release, and then get your inner ted out as soon as the tree unlocks after release... tedu time? :)
Re: faithd fcntl diff
On 05/03/13(Tue) 09:03, David Hill wrote: On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:54:58AM -0700, Bob Beck wrote: On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:00:08PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:05:29 -0600 From: Todd T. Fries t...@fries.net In light of nat64 in pf(4), what purpose does faithd(8) serve anymore? I played with it a bit over a decade ago, but don't recall having any use for it in the last number of years. I vote it gets tedu'ed. I fear it's too late in the game to do that now. Bring this up again after unlock. Meanwhile, perhaps that bug (if it really is a bug) should be fixed? yeah, I'd probably shy away from tedu'ing it at this late stage in the release cycle - make sure it's adequate for release, and then get your inner ted out as soon as the tree unlocks after release... tedu time? :) Sure do you have a diff?
Re: faithd fcntl diff
On 11 February 2013 07:05, Todd T. Fries t...@fries.net wrote: In light of nat64 in pf(4), what purpose does faithd(8) serve anymore? I played with it a bit over a decade ago, but don't recall having any use for it in the last number of years. I vote it gets tedu'ed. I vote for it too, I remember suggesting it last year. Penned by David Hill on 20130209 12:53.51, we have: | Anyone want to OK and commit? | | On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 05:19:18PM -0500, David Hill wrote: | O_NONBLOCK is set with F_SETFL | | Index: usr.sbin/faithd/tcp.c | === | RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/faithd/tcp.c,v | retrieving revision 1.12 | diff -N -u -p usr.sbin/faithd/tcp.c | --- usr.sbin/faithd/tcp.c8 Sep 2002 01:20:15 - 1.12 | +++ usr.sbin/faithd/tcp.c20 Jan 2013 22:17:13 - | @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ relay(int s_rcv, int s_snd, const char *service, int d | FD_ZERO(readfds); | FD_ZERO(writefds); | FD_ZERO(exceptfds); | -fcntl(s_snd, F_SETFD, O_NONBLOCK); | +fcntl(s_snd, F_SETFL, O_NONBLOCK); | oreadfds = readfds; owritefds = writefds; oexceptfds = exceptfds; | if (s_rcv = FD_SETSIZE) | exit_failure(descriptor too big); | -- Todd Fries .. t...@fries.net |\ 1.636.410.0632 (voice) | Free Daemon Consulting, LLC\ 1.405.227.9094 (voice) | http://FreeDaemonConsulting.com\ 1.866.792.3418 (FAX) | PO Box 16169, Oklahoma City, OK 73113 \ sip:freedae...@ekiga.net | ..in support of free software solutions. \ sip:4052279...@ekiga.net \ 37E7 D3EB 74D0 8D66 A68D B866 0326 204E 3F42 004A http://todd.fries.net/pgp.txt
Re: faithd fcntl diff
On 2013/02/11 00:05, Todd T. Fries wrote: In light of nat64 in pf(4), what purpose does faithd(8) serve anymore? ftp translation; but I doubt anyone uses that. I played with it a bit over a decade ago, but don't recall having any use for it in the last number of years. I vote it gets tedu'ed. +1. don't forget the kernel parts!
Re: faithd fcntl diff
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:05:29 -0600 From: Todd T. Fries t...@fries.net In light of nat64 in pf(4), what purpose does faithd(8) serve anymore? I played with it a bit over a decade ago, but don't recall having any use for it in the last number of years. I vote it gets tedu'ed. I fear it's too late in the game to do that now. Bring this up again after unlock. Meanwhile, perhaps that bug (if it really is a bug) should be fixed?
Re: faithd fcntl diff
Penned by Mark Kettenis on 20130211 10:00.08, we have: | Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:05:29 -0600 | From: Todd T. Fries t...@fries.net | | In light of nat64 in pf(4), what purpose does faithd(8) serve anymore? | | I played with it a bit over a decade ago, but don't recall having any use | for it in the last number of years. | | I vote it gets tedu'ed. | | I fear it's too late in the game to do that now. | | Bring this up again after unlock. Meanwhile, perhaps that bug (if it | really is a bug) should be fixed? I spoke with David Hill on irc and turns out it was found during a O_CLOEXEC cleanup. Since we strive for correct code everywhere, makes sense to me to commit the fix, so we put better 'last version before teduing' code in the attic after unlock. Thanks, -- Todd Fries .. t...@fries.net |\ 1.636.410.0632 (voice) | Free Daemon Consulting, LLC\ 1.405.227.9094 (voice) | http://FreeDaemonConsulting.com\ 1.866.792.3418 (FAX) | PO Box 16169, Oklahoma City, OK 73113 \ sip:freedae...@ekiga.net | ..in support of free software solutions. \ sip:4052279...@ekiga.net \ 37E7 D3EB 74D0 8D66 A68D B866 0326 204E 3F42 004A http://todd.fries.net/pgp.txt
Re: faithd fcntl diff
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:00:08PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:05:29 -0600 From: Todd T. Fries t...@fries.net In light of nat64 in pf(4), what purpose does faithd(8) serve anymore? I played with it a bit over a decade ago, but don't recall having any use for it in the last number of years. I vote it gets tedu'ed. I fear it's too late in the game to do that now. Bring this up again after unlock. Meanwhile, perhaps that bug (if it really is a bug) should be fixed? yeah, I'd probably shy away from tedu'ing it at this late stage in the release cycle - make sure it's adequate for release, and then get your inner ted out as soon as the tree unlocks after release...
