07.04.2021 12:49, Scott Bennett via freebsd-stable wrote:
> At least w.r.t. gvinum's raid5, I can attest that the kernel panics
> are real. Before settling on ZFS raidz2 for my largest storage pool, I
> experimented with gstripe(8), gmirror(8), graid3(8), and graid5(8) (from
> sysutils/graid
Ed,
On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 13:25:44 -0400 Ed Maste wrote:
>Vinum is a Logical Volume Manager that was introduced in FreeBSD 3.0,
>and for FreeBSD 5 was ported to geom(4) as gvinum. gvinum has had no
>specific development at least as far back as 2010 and it is not clear
>how well it works today.
On 4/6/21 5:32 PM, Kevin P. Neal wrote:
On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 09:19:27AM +0100, Gerald de la Pascua wrote:
"Can I ask, for those who do enable it, why isn’t “sftp” acceptable (or
“scp”)? Both provide a similar function, securely, which also works with a
I just tried to sftp to ftp.freebsd.
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 at 06:49, Robert Blayzor via freebsd-stable
wrote:
>
> I have several servers running 11.4 and 12.2 that do nightly portsnap
> updates and the last time they've seen anything new is 3/31/2021, since
> then, nothing.
>
> This seems highly unusual since seems like there was always
On 2021-04-04 12:10, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Sat, 2021-04-03 at 16:39 -0400, Ed Maste wrote:
I propose deprecating the ftpd currently included in the base system
before FreeBSD 14, and opened review D26447
(https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26447) to add a notice to the man page.
I had originally planne
On 2021-04-03 13:45, Warner Losh wrote:
On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 2:40 PM Ed Maste wrote:
I propose deprecating the ftpd currently included in the base system
before FreeBSD 14, and opened review D26447
(https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26447) to add a notice to the man page.
I had originally planned
> On Apr 6, 2021, at 7:10 AM, Gary Palmer wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 06:49:17AM -0400, Robert Blayzor via freebsd-stable
> wrote:
>> I have several servers running 11.4 and 12.2 that do nightly portsnap
>> updates and the last time they've seen anything new is 3/31/2021, since
>> then,
06.04.2021 15:37, aventa...@fastmail.fm wrote:
> Deprecating base system ftpd does seem to be a good idea, especially for
> FreeBSD users wanting to use their computer
> as a workstation/desktop instead of as a server. I think the argument
> becomes, "who is our target audience?"
> If the target
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, aventa...@fastmail.fm wrote:
Deprecating base system ftpd does seem to be a good idea,
especially for FreeBSD users wanting to use their computer as a
workstation/desktop instead of as a server. I think the argument becomes,
"who is our target audience?" If the target audi
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 5:21 AM Andrea Brancatelli via freebsd-stable <
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 2021-04-05 02:05, Daniel Morante via freebsd-stable wrote:
>
> > My vote is for no.
> >
> > Reasoning is simple... at what point does it stop? By continuously
> moving stuff from base to
Deprecating base system ftpd does seem to be a good idea, especially for
FreeBSD users wanting to use their computer as a workstation/desktop instead of
as a server. I think the argument becomes, "who is our target audience?" If the
target audience is both server and desktop users, then minimizi
On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 06:49:17AM -0400, Robert Blayzor via freebsd-stable
wrote:
> I have several servers running 11.4 and 12.2 that do nightly portsnap
> updates and the last time they've seen anything new is 3/31/2021, since
> then, nothing.
>
> This seems highly unusual since seems like ther
I have several servers running 11.4 and 12.2 that do nightly portsnap
updates and the last time they've seen anything new is 3/31/2021, since
then, nothing.
This seems highly unusual since seems like there was always SOMETHING
updated daily now nothing.
--
inoc.net!rblayzor
XMPP: rblayzo
Am 06.04.2021 um 12:08 schrieb Helge Oldach :
>
> Stefan Bethke wrote on Tue, 06 Apr 2021 11:29:34 +0200 (CEST):
>> Strato did disable FTP access over a year ago,
>
> Actually it was effective October 20, 2020.
You are correct; I was remembering the announcement, not the switch off.
> and instr
On 06/04/2021 11:29, Stefan Bethke wrote:
Am 05.04.2021 um 21:01 schrieb Patrick M. Hausen :
But still even on "the Internet", FTP is the most used method for customers
of static website hosting. You cannot teach these people what an SSH key is.
Just my experience, but backed by a load of custo
05.04.2021 19:57, Alan Somers write:
> I wouldn't say that anything is "very good" when it has no test suite
> whatsoever.
Many years of employment of ftpd in different environments (sometimes under
heavy load) means something, too.
Maybe even more than synthetic tests.
___
On 2021-04-05 02:05, Daniel Morante via freebsd-stable wrote:
> My vote is for no.
>
> Reasoning is simple... at what point does it stop? By continuously moving
> stuff from base to ports, FreeBSD slowly becomes just a Kernel. 😉
I strongly agree with this consideration.
---
Andrea Brancate
06.04.2021 1:27, Roger Leigh wrote:
>>> I propose deprecating the ftpd currently included in the base system
>>> before FreeBSD 14, and opened review D26447
>>> (https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26447) to add a notice to the man page.
>>> I had originally planned to try to do this before 13.0, but it
Am 05.04.2021 um 21:01 schrieb Patrick M. Hausen :
>
> But still even on "the Internet", FTP is the most used method for customers
> of static website hosting. You cannot teach these people what an SSH key is.
> Just my experience, but backed by a load of customer interactions over more
> than 20
+1 again from me too, keep it,
It seems a pointless change of something that it seems a reasonable number
of people are still using, even if there are better tools now,
G
On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 8:16 PM Ted Hatfield wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Apr 2021, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> >> Am
"Can I ask, for those who do enable it, why isn’t “sftp” acceptable (or
“scp”)? Both provide a similar function, securely, which also works with a
basic installation without any ports. SSHFXP, the protocol underlying sftp
is better specified, less ambiguous and more fault tolerant and safe than
t
Speaking for myself, like some others here, I would find the removal of
ftp inconvenient, and if it is removed,
please could we have it in an easy to install and configure port.
We have a number of apps that transfer data, and legacy issues mean that
it's hard to transfer to another protocol.
I
On 4/5/21 8:27 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
Can I ask, for those who do enable it, why isn’t “sftp” acceptable (or “scp”)?
Because it's an *incompatible* replacement.
While I never enabled ftpd, I was once asked to.
I refused and enabled sftp instead: the problem was that for 99% of the
customers
23 matches
Mail list logo
