Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

r* Programs Being Removed from OpenBSD -current

Posted by timothy on from the but-it's-still-an-important-letter dept.

moonboy writes: "This post over at OpenBSD Journal tells of the r* programs (rsh, rlogin, rcopy, etc) being removed from the -current tree. Can Telnet and FTP be far behind? I say good riddance."

7 of 139 comments (clear)

  1. BSD is not dying, it's busy cleaning by ObviousGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Removing redundant, unnecessary, and potentially dangerous programs from the distro is a really good idea.

    Creating the symlinks just adds complexity to a system that doesn't need it.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
  2. Something has been lost here... by seraphim+via · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I believe something has eluded the 'BSD is dying crowd' and the 'Perl is winbest' crowd.

    For starters, BSD is not dying in my eyes. Linux is great, I love it, but it is seriously bloated. 'But seraphim,' you say, 'you are a fag man for thinking these thingz.' I have recently bought SuSE 8.0 Pro. It is terribly bloated. Its really good for a desktop machine, but for a down and dirty linux box, its just not there. I have also used Redhat 7.0-7.2. They are extremely bloated as well. Not quite to the M$ extreme, but still dangerous. Slackware is the only linux I have used that gets me feeling that I am involved in the console and that its working with me, rather than me forcing it to do things. BSD is a down and dirty OS. Its great for just digging your teeth in and tearing into. It is not your fancy pants linux distro or desktop GUI OS (i leave that up to my new iMac :D
    And on the issue of Perl. Perl is not being taken out of FreeBSD. It has not been rebuked by the FreeBSD staff and shunned to the 9th circle of hell. It is, however, not included into the base install. Saving, around 40mb, i believe. Now you say 'You silly fagtrot, thats not that much.' Well, yes and no. Yes it isnt a lot when you are running BSD on a AMD 2100XP with a 80g hard drive. I , however, run my BSD on a 486 with a 800mb hard drive. Space is key to me. If i want to install perl, i simply say, 'Hey there BSD, install me some perl.' Otherwise i dont really need it.

    Hopefully this will clear some things up.

    --
    But he was unmoved, and cried: "If I am mad, it is mercy! May the gods pity the man who in his callousness can remain sa
    1. Re:Something has been lost here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      For sake of argument, I'll assume this isn't a troll for now ... apparently enough moderators did.

      For starters, BSD is not dying in my eyes. Linux is great, I love it, but it is seriously bloated.

      You make this statement, and never back it up with evidence. You state cursory observations based on your experiences with two distributions of Linux. You do not even go into detail--or even offer a superficial explanation--as to why you feel these are bloated. You have seemingly just chosen a) the largest [7 CDs or a DVD] distribution, SuSE, and b) RedHat which seems to be the most common target for abuse (some of it deserved, I could grant) -- however, you do not offer any reason why you feel these are bloated.

      'But seraphim,' you say, 'you are a fag man for thinking these thingz.' I have recently bought SuSE 8.0 Pro. It is terribly bloated.

      I am running SuSE 7.1 on all of my Linux machines now -- some of them are still stock installs, some just updated using Yast, and two of them don't look anything like SuSE anymore excepting Yast and a couple other things I've kept around. One, my laptop, doesn't look anything like SuSE at all--not even Yast [SuSE's installer/configurer/auto-updater]. The reason I chose SuSE was because of the number of included programs in the distro, which, when you're on a dialup connection, saves a lot of headache and time. Things I use often, and need the latest version, I might still go out and get their package/source but for most things, I no longer need to. Just because they provide you with 7 CDs worth of data [four binary, three source I think] doesn't mean that you have to install everything. This is often the complaint with MSWin--forced install.

      My laptop has SuSE's "minimal" install, with the addition of selections from the "developers" package (by default minimal doesn't install gcc or make). I've built it up from there. I've even built up a SuSE deb based system at one point ... which I don't really feel like doing again...

      Its really good for a desktop machine, but for a down and dirty linux box, its just not there. I have also used Redhat 7.0-7.2. They are extremely bloated as well. Not quite to the M$ extreme, but still dangerous.

      I have no clue what you mean by "dangerous" (aside from some security issues in the default RH installs, granted ...)

      I still do not know what you consider "bloat" however. Many Linux distros are trying to make their system usable on the desktop, hence SuSE's "default with Office" option. As stated, SuSE has other options such as "minimal" "default" "full" and options to set it up as a server config by default, and very easy to use individual package selection during install [and after]. If you don't want the glitz--such as kde and gnome--don't install it, I haven't. The same is available for BSD systems as well [I have KDE installed on a P120 Free box which is set up for guest access in my house].

      Slackware is the only linux I have used that gets me feeling that I am involved in the console and that its working with me, rather than me forcing it to do things.

      I also suggest Debian, unless you're adversed to popular package management methods. I've heard more than one person remark that debian is little more than FreeBSD with a Linux kernel. However, no Linux system prevents you from accessing the underlying configuration files (which is what I can only assume you mean) or just running from a terminal. I've heard bad things about Lycoris in this respect, but they make it clear that's not what they're trying for--i assume once it's installed though you've got access to everything just like everything else, including on the Zaurus.

      Distros like SuSE and RH are just offering a centralized configuration tool which you can choose to use. I know SuSE's works in console mode just as well as in X, and isn't all that different from /sys/stand on Free.

      BSD is a down and dirty OS. Its great for just digging your teeth in and tearing into. It is not your fancy pants linux distro or desktop GUI OS (i leave that up to my new iMac :D

      You can also try Debian or Yellow Dog on your iMac. SuSE also runs well, I'm told. I have no experience with the PPC version of any of them however.

      And on the issue of Perl. Perl is not being taken out of FreeBSD. It has not been rebuked by the FreeBSD staff and shunned to the 9th circle of hell. It is, however, not included into the base install. Saving, around 40mb, i believe. Now you say 'You silly fagtrot, thats not that much.' Well, yes and no. Yes it isnt a lot when you are running BSD on a AMD 2100XP with a 80g hard drive.
      I , however, run my BSD on a 486 with a 800mb hard drive. Space is key to me. If i want to install perl, i simply say, 'Hey there BSD, install me some perl.' Otherwise i dont really need it.

      For the record, up until a couple years ago, I was running an old version of RH on a 386 without any problems. That's what the Linux kernel was designed for, and that's still what even the latest RH states as minimum system requirements.

      Hopefully this will clear some things up.

      I think it clears it up nicely. You sir, are a troll.

  3. Hmmm, mixed feelings on this...... by jsimon12 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At first when I read this I was a little against it, now that I thought about it I am all for it, too many people just leave services open and get hacked. So the less that is loaded the less that can be hacked.

    If you want FTP, download the latest version of ProFTPd or Wu-FTPd and load those, same with Apache.

  4. No big deal... by j-turkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its about time that these tools be phased out -- the services have been shut off (by default) in just about every *nix distribution on the market over the last decade. Someone needs to pioneer killing them -- and a strip-down default install like OpenBSD seems to be the appropriate place to do that.

    There's a number of "what about me" folks out there -- who have some mitigating circumstance to need those tools (see here). It seems that these folks are just speaking out to hear themselves speak. Its not like these services are being excluded from the ports tree. Even if they were, you can still grab the source and build it yourself -- hell, there are still binary packages out there that you can just build.

    Lastly, as stated in the thread here, its just the servers that are getting the axe, the clients stay...so all of the valuable tools (telnet, rlogin, etc) aren't going away.


    -Turkey

    --

    -Turkey

  5. I got a good laugh out of your reply...... by jsimon12 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not sure what universe you live in but you need to keep up on patches on any OS you use, whether it is OpenBSD/Solaris/Linux/Winblows etc etc etc. Granted most Unices don't need the level of patching that a Winblows box needs but it is a good admin who keeps his/her eyes open for issues that need to be resolved. But if that isn't your method for admining would you mind posting the IP's for boxes you manage, I need something to root ;)

  6. Don't lose telnet. by dsb3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I use telnet more often than I use ssh.

    Ssh - I use for connecting to other machines.
    Telnet - I use for testing webservers, mail servers, news servers, testing whether ssh servers are alive and what version they're running, etc etc.

    Just because the telnet DAEMON is undesirable doesn't mean the client is so too.

    --

    Slashdot? Oh, I just read it for the articles.