Re: Moving telnet/telnetd from base to pkgsrc

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On Dec 15,  8:13pm, maya%netbsd.org@localhost wrote:
} On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 01:45:04PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
} >     Date:        Fri, 14 Dec 2018 21:28:34 -0800
} >     From:        John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>
} >     Message-ID:  <201812150528.wBF5SYhr025993%server.cornerstoneservice.ca@localhost>
} > 
} >   | As kre noted, it is probably the oldest network application
} >   | around.  According to Wikipedia, the protocol was developed in
} >   | 1969, predating TCP/IP, which means that it is probably the oldest
} >   | TCP/IP application there is.
} > 
} > That's actually what I meant.   I have no idea in which order the BSD
} > applications were written (nor, for that matter, their original origins.)
} > 
} > But if there are bugs in any of them (and that is not impossible, just as
} > with any other software) then we should simply fix them, not just declare
} > some apps as "too old, abandon it".
} > 
} > I also simply cannot believe that any issue that might exist in telnet is
} > going to be any worse than firefox with a http:// URL ... and I do not see
} > anyone suggesting that firefox (and every other browser) should be
} > abandoned.
} 
} firefox makes an active effort to handle such things and recently had a
} massive rewrite into a language better suited for large scale handling
} of untrusted input. They also attempt to limit the impact of bugs with

     What evidence do you have that the language is better?  Besides
that, you can write a steaming pile of dung in any language.

} sandboxing (although this doesn't apply for netbsd)

     Why not?

} We can probably get away with keeping C for simple things like telnet,
} but it takes fuzzing, love, and the willingness to limit the number of
} features.

     Really?

} The discussion about telnet was something like
} "Why is doing more input processing after hitting an error? then again,
} if I change this, there's probably a Rube Goldberg mistake of engineering
} reason that it will break 80% of the remaining users of telnet (all
} four of them)"

     This "all four of them" is a truly moronic comment.

} "That is absolutely what will happen. That's what happens when you touch
} telnet"
} 
} Even the idae of writing a new one was rejected, because who is going to
} test it against all the legacy servers today?

     The only person bring up that idea was you, and you rejected
it yourself.  Given that, by your own admission, it wouldn't be
functional, it makes no sense to write it.

}-- End of excerpt from maya%netbsd.org@localhost