Subject: Re: comments on i386 -1.2BETA snapshot
To: Theo de Raadt <>
From: Jordan K. Hubbard <>
List: port-i386
Date: 08/28/1996 02:13:29
[Uh, hey, when did wander into this conversation?
 I'll do one followup and then wander them back out again, since
 I'm not entirely sure that they wish to participate in this discussion]

> configuration mechanism.  One of my developers is trying to steal the
> existing FreeBSD install stuff for our upcoming release, I hope this
> isn't too changed yet.

Actually, I'm currently tearing the installation code limb from limb
so our users can finally have the linux-style "netconfig" and
"diskconfig" style commands they've been screeching for so long, while
still preserving the existing framework if you "run it from the top."
Nonetheless, you can always use an older snapshot of it.

> Well, I don't have OpenBSD binaries for it, and Modula.. uhm..  The
> loathing I have for that is only exceeded by my fear and memories.

Huh?  I thought OpenBSD ran FreeBSD binaries just fine!  I'm certainly
under the impression that the NetBSD folks can run the cvsup client
and server binaries I pointed to earlier, and I'd have thought OpenBSD
would have inheirited that feature automagically.  Since we're talking
about cvsup, and I'm a big big fan of this particular little tool,
someone in the NetBSD camp really *should* set up a cvsupd and use it
for providing *only* tagged sources, e.g. in cvsup's "checkout" mode
rather than CVS repository copy mode.  If you were really paranoid
about someone checking out tainted code by knowing the right tag to
use, you could even add something to restrict the list of tags it'd
take.  I'm sure it'd be a minor bag on the side to add, and John
Polstra could probably even tell you guys how to do it if you asked
him nicely.  Then you could make multiple branches of NetBSD (or
OpenBSD) available without having to actually physically check out a
copy of that branch on disk somewhere, as you currently must with sup.
CVSup derives everything from the single respository copy, and (as I
said before) is *waaay* faster and more efficient than sup.  It
understands all possible RCS file operations implicitly, and
communicates them at a high level, preserving any local work you may
have on a different branch (if you're cvsup'ing the repository - only
relevant to OpenBSD).  It is, all around, a much much better mousetrap
and you should all use it.  End of sermon. :-)

> Thanks.  Was there anything dirty in your tree that you had to clean
> out first?

No, we just needed some time to have a look first.

> Users are suffering if they are running NetBSD, unfortunately.  They
> are running a buggy system shipped by a group that is ignoring changes
> that are 100% applicable and trivially merged.  Well, by now it is
> getting harder, much harder.  The loss to the users is incremental, and
> it's because of arrogance.

Uhm.  I'll have let the NetBSD folks respond to this one, should they
feel it worth responding to.

>From my own persective, I can only say that I've dealt with many of
the NetBSD core team members over the years, and the overwhelming
majority of current -core members, that being specifically JT, Paul,
Christos and Jason, have been more than reasonable to work with.
Sure, all engineers are arrogant to *some* extent, that's just in the
nature of the profession, but I'd have to say that if these guys are
suffering from an overabundance of anything, it's not arrogance.
Fatigue, maybe!

> OpenBSD has been rocking the world doing exactly that.  FreeBSD needs a
> few more people looking at this here source tree... :)

Time...  time...  It's hard enough finding time for the projects
sitting right in front of my face, much less over in OpenBSD land. :)
We're actively recruiting volunteers to comb through and any all such
available resources, however, and I hope to see things coming across
at a more rapid pace in the upcoming months.

> BTW, anyone know who I should talk to about XFree86 changes I want for
> increased security?  [OpenBSD specific, unless you guys copy them...]

I'm not sure who's awake over there right now.  If the changes aren't
sensitive, I'd just raise it in, otherwise you
probably just want to raise it with David Dawes.