On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:00:06PM -0800, John Nemeth wrote: > } The previous telnet thread, contentious as it has been, has completely > } missed the critical context, which is that telnet is 14,700 lines > } cutpasted from the Necronomicon and telnetd is only slightly better. > > Yeah, so?
So it's a danger to have around, given that it's network-facing. Have you looked at the code? Have you tried making changes to it? Do you have any grounds for claiming it's not as bad as I say it is? It's the worst code I've ever worked on, and I've spent a long time (probably more than most people here) cleaning out toxic software messes and I've seen a lot. > why aren't you volunteering to do the rewrite Because I'm not one of the people claiming I need it because I can't learn to type 'nc' instead. Because the amount of discretionary hacking time I have these days is measured in tens of hours per year. Because I already threw plenty of time down this rathole in the past (note the 12000 line diff I posted a couple days ago). Because anyone could do it and I should be spending what time I have on things that other people can't or won't do. Etc. And also, because the attitude in this thread (yours, but not just yours) is ticking me off. I have better things to do than provide software for free to people who respond to my carefully considered opinion with contempt. -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org