Subject: Re: let's get small
To: Steven M. Bellovin <email@example.com>
From: Erik Berls <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/26/2007 23:22:09
I don't think the goal was to move them out of base. I think what's
wanted is them to have a smaller footprint. This functionality is
needed in small systems. Tho, hardware is catching up. In some
places we've got 32M of system RAM!
On 2/26/07, Steven M. Bellovin <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 16:03:00 -0600
> David Young <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Do you have any ideas what can be done to these huge programs in the
> > base system to make them small yet reasonably effective on an
> > IPv4/IPv6 router/bridge?
> > * wpa_supplicant
> > * hostapd
> > * dig / host
> > * dhclient
> > * dhcpd
> > * netstat
> > * pfctl
> > * tcpdump
> Which should be in pkgsrc instead? (I'd ask "which should be in an
> optional syspkg instead, but that would open a different thread...)
> My candidates would include hostapd, dhcpd, and tcpdump. I might
> include dig, but I think it's part of bind and hence harder to move.
> OTOH, maybe we shouldn't have any of bind in the base system. Besides,
> it's such a generally useful debuggin tool.
> My rationale for these choices: they're specialized applications needed
> by only a few hosts.
> I'm surprised there's no simpler dhclient in pkgsrc.
> --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb