Re: removing SVR4 binary compatibilty layer

2017-02-15 Thread Warner Losh 
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Mark Millard  wrote:
> Gleb Smirnoff glebius at FreeBSD.org wrote
> on Tue Feb 14 18:32:40 UTC 2017 :
>
>>   After some discussion on svn mailing list [1], there is intention
>> to remove SVR4 binary compatibilty layer from FreeBSD head, meaning
>> that FreeBSD 12.0-RELEASE, available in couple of years would
>> be shipped without it. There is no intention of merge of the removal.
>> The stable@ mailing list added for wider audience.
>
> Can we presume no invalidation of the TARGET_ARCH=powerpc ABI?
> It is SVR4 based as I remember (unlike TARGET_ARCH=powerpc64 ).

This is just the SVR4 image activation. The ABI stuff that you are
talking about is different. It won't affect that.

Warner
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: removing SVR4 binary compatibilty layer

2017-02-15 Thread Mark Millard 
Gleb Smirnoff glebius at FreeBSD.org wrote
on Tue Feb 14 18:32:40 UTC 2017 :

>   After some discussion on svn mailing list [1], there is intention
> to remove SVR4 binary compatibilty layer from FreeBSD head, meaning
> that FreeBSD 12.0-RELEASE, available in couple of years would
> be shipped without it. There is no intention of merge of the removal.
> The stable@ mailing list added for wider audience.

Can we presume no invalidation of the TARGET_ARCH=powerpc ABI?
It is SVR4 based as I remember (unlike TARGET_ARCH=powerpc64 ).

===
Mark Millard
markmi at dsl-only.net

___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: removing SVR4 binary compatibilty layer

2017-02-15 Thread Peter Jeremy 
On 2017-Feb-14 10:32:32 -0800, Gleb Smirnoff  wrote:
>  After some discussion on svn mailing list [1], there is intention
>to remove SVR4 binary compatibilty layer from FreeBSD head, meaning
>that FreeBSD 12.0-RELEASE, available in couple of years would
>be shipped without it. There is no intention of merge of the removal.
>The stable@ mailing list added for wider audience.

Can I suggest that we put some warnings into the SVr4 image activation
code and MFC that to at least 11 to try and smoke out anyone who might
actually be using it.

-- 
Peter Jeremy


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: removing SVR4 binary compatibilty layer

2017-02-15 Thread mokhi 
Well, I'd like to offer help keeping it (because on a personal
opinion, I'd like being compatible `:-D).
But the reasons are pretty reasonable and convincing :-).
I have no more objections against removing it when security risks involves.

--
Best wishes, MMokhi.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: removing SVR4 binary compatibilty layer

2017-02-15 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp 

In message <20170215081430.gc58...@freebsd.org>, Gleb Smirnoff writes:

>Well, we all "maintain" it, meaning that we keep it compilable. However,
>I'm sure that no one checks the functionality. There are no regression
>tests, and seems to be no users.

And probably nobody ever bothered to check the code comprehensively
for security risks...

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: removing SVR4 binary compatibilty layer

2017-02-15 Thread Gleb Smirnoff 
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:56:29AM +0330, mokhi wrote:
m> Is this removing is because no-interest on maintaining it?
m> 
m> If it helps, I am working to use the `kern_* instead sys_*` as
m> mentioned patch in that discussion suggests for svr4, if this helps.

Well, we all "maintain" it, meaning that we keep it compilable. However,
I'm sure that no one checks the functionality. There are no regression
tests, and seems to be no users. I recently found that if you run
GENERIC and 'kldload svr4.ko', the socket layer compatibility will
be broken, since SVR4 requires COMPAT_OLDSOCK. And that has been for
decades, and no one notices that. I bet there are simply no users.

Towing this piece of code into the future is just a waste of time.

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: removing SVR4 binary compatibilty layer

2017-02-14 Thread mokhi 
Hi,

Is this removing is because no-interest on maintaining it?

If it helps, I am working to use the `kern_* instead sys_*` as
mentioned patch in that discussion suggests for svr4, if this helps.


--
Best wishes, MMokhi.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

removing SVR4 binary compatibilty layer

2017-02-14 Thread Gleb Smirnoff 
  Hello!

  After some discussion on svn mailing list [1], there is intention
to remove SVR4 binary compatibilty layer from FreeBSD head, meaning
that FreeBSD 12.0-RELEASE, available in couple of years would
be shipped without it. There is no intention of merge of the removal.
The stable@ mailing list added for wider audience.

P.S. I account any objector as taker of maintainership :)

[1] https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/2017-February/096502.html

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"