Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-06-13 Thread Michal Mazurek
Let's not support loading addresses from /etc/appletalk.names. There are two points to consider: * tcpdump uses just one file now (/etc/pf.os) which means we can probably simplify priv_getlines(), but let's not right now. * there is some lookup code left, but let's remove it later. removin

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-06-11 Thread Theo de Raadt
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 09:42:44PM +0200, Michal Mazurek wrote: > > Let's start by ignoring the existence of AppleTalk in the manpage, > > reducing it by 10%. This leaves mention of atalk in the syntax of libpcap. > > > > A second diff will remove /etc/atalk.names support reducing the amount > >

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-06-08 Thread Jason McIntyre
On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 09:42:44PM +0200, Michal Mazurek wrote: > Let's start by ignoring the existence of AppleTalk in the manpage, > reducing it by 10%. This leaves mention of atalk in the syntax of libpcap. > > A second diff will remove /etc/atalk.names support reducing the amount > of appletal

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-06-08 Thread Claudio Jeker
On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 09:42:44PM +0200, Michal Mazurek wrote: > Let's start by ignoring the existence of AppleTalk in the manpage, > reducing it by 10%. This leaves mention of atalk in the syntax of libpcap. > > A second diff will remove /etc/atalk.names support reducing the amount > of appletal

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-06-08 Thread Michal Mazurek
Let's start by ignoring the existence of AppleTalk in the manpage, reducing it by 10%. This leaves mention of atalk in the syntax of libpcap. A second diff will remove /etc/atalk.names support reducing the amount of appletalk code significantly. Comments? OK? Index: usr.sbin/tcpdump/tcpdump.8 ==

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-05-30 Thread Ian McWilliam
: tech@openbsd.org Subject: Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support * Theo de Raadt [2017-05-30 10:56]: > > How about just dropping support for /etc/appletalk.names, which as far > > as I can tell was never used, and drop the manpage bit, reducing it by > > 10%. Most of the text in the m

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-05-30 Thread Theo de Raadt
> * Theo de Raadt [2017-05-30 10:56]: > > > How about just dropping support for /etc/appletalk.names, which as far > > > as I can tell was never used, and drop the manpage bit, reducing it by > > > 10%. Most of the text in the manpage is outdated anyway, talking about > > > /etc/atalk.names - supp

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-05-30 Thread Henning Brauer
* Theo de Raadt [2017-05-30 10:56]: > > How about just dropping support for /etc/appletalk.names, which as far > > as I can tell was never used, and drop the manpage bit, reducing it by > > 10%. Most of the text in the manpage is outdated anyway, talking about > > /etc/atalk.names - support for wh

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-05-30 Thread Theo de Raadt
> How about just dropping support for /etc/appletalk.names, which as far > as I can tell was never used, and drop the manpage bit, reducing it by > 10%. Most of the text in the manpage is outdated anyway, talking about > /etc/atalk.names - support for which was removed in 2004 with the > privsep wo

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-05-30 Thread Michal Mazurek
How about just dropping support for /etc/appletalk.names, which as far as I can tell was never used, and drop the manpage bit, reducing it by 10%. Most of the text in the manpage is outdated anyway, talking about /etc/atalk.names - support for which was removed in 2004 with the privsep work. Someth

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-05-28 Thread Ted Unangst
Theo de Raadt wrote: > I'm not sure the direction this goes. > > Today atalk, and over the next month delete 20 protocols, then anything > before ARP? > > What's the plan here. This code is heavily privsep, pledge, etc. Is > there a problem with it? > > If such a packet showed up on a network

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-05-28 Thread Theo de Raadt
I'm not sure the direction this goes. Today atalk, and over the next month delete 20 protocols, then anything before ARP? What's the plan here. This code is heavily privsep, pledge, etc. Is there a problem with it? If such a packet showed up on a network I'd prefer it is *identified* in some m

Re: tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-05-28 Thread Henning Brauer
* Michal Mazurek [2017-05-28 16:00]: > Remove atalk support. Significantly shortens the manpage. libpcap still > supports it. This diff doesn't include the removal of two files: > appletalk.h and print-atalk.c. afaict atalk is so dead that the corpse is way beyond the point of smelling - so yeah,

tcpdump: drop atalk support

2017-05-28 Thread Michal Mazurek
Remove atalk support. Significantly shortens the manpage. libpcap still supports it. This diff doesn't include the removal of two files: appletalk.h and print-atalk.c. Index: usr.sbin/tcpdump/INSTALL === RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/tc