From owner-freebsd-current Wed Mar 5 15:26:46 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ECA937B401 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 15:26:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from horkos.telenet-ops.be (horkos.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.45]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D319343F85 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 15:26:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from philip@paeps.cx) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by horkos.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with SMTP id E553A83C0C for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 00:26:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from fortuna.home.paeps.cx (D5768746.kabel.telenet.be [213.118.135.70]) by horkos.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id C572983C08 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 00:26:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from juno.home.paeps.cx (juno.home.paeps.cx [2001:ab8:2007:0:240:f4ff:fe31:3090]) by fortuna.home.paeps.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9AB620A9 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 00:27:52 +0100 (CET) Received: by juno.home.paeps.cx (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 683B21191; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 00:26:41 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 00:26:41 +0100 From: Philip Paeps To: "FreeBSD-Current (E-mail)" Subject: Re: Plea for base system trim Message-ID: <20030305232641.GC621@juno.home.paeps.cx> Mail-Followup-To: "FreeBSD-Current (E-mail)" References: <2F03DF3DDE57D411AFF4009027B8C36704129AE6@exchange-uk.isltd.insignia.com> <20030305015947.M18288@znfgre.tberna.bet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030305015947.M18288@znfgre.tberna.bet> X-Date-in-Rome: ante diem III Nonas Martias MMDCCLVI ab Urbe Condida X-PGP-Fingerprint: FA74 3C27 91A6 79D5 F6D3 FC53 BF4B D0E6 049D B879 X-Message-Flag: Get a proper mailclient! Mutt: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 2003-03-05 02:14:16 (-0800), Doug Barton wrote: > On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Subscriber wrote: > > Would the powers that be please consider removing sendmail, bind and > > openssl from the base system, as was done for perl with 5.0? > > For example, as BIND maintainer I actually _support_ the theory of removing > BIND, however the reality is a little different. There are three main > components of BIND; the named stuff (sbin/named, sbin/ndc, etc.), the > userland stuff (dig, host, etc.), and the resolver library. Of those three > things, we actually need the last two in order to include ourselves in a > useful definition of "Unix system" Is it actually possible for one to build a custom release without the ``unnecessary'' BIND bits? I haven't grepped the source, forgive me, but what does 'NO_BIND=true' actually do? If I were to make a release like that, would that end me up without resolver as well? Likewise, would building 'NO_SENDMAIL=true' build me a pristine system void of Sendmail bits, or will there always be some stuff left? If those two knobs do what they promise to do, it should be fairly trivial to compare a custom release tree with the installed base, and nuke the things one doesn't like from the base-system at will? Or am I missing something? :-) I'm pretty happy about having BIND and Sendmail in the base-system. Disk space costs nearly nothing these days, and as long as they're not running (and have their executable bits stripped, 'just in case'), I don't particularly mind them taking up a few bytes of room. > (although I'd LOVE to nuke nslookup, if I thought I could ever live down the > whining and crying it would cause). :-) Perhaps a NO_NSLOOKUP flag? ;-) > So keeping BIND in the base actually serves a purpose. Similar arguments can > be made for the other components you listed. Definitely! > Now that said, I've been working off and on to make it easier to replace > parts of the base with stuff from the ports. Both BIND ports have > PORT_REPLACES_BASE_ Makefile options, and I know that they are useful > because I use them at work. I just spotted those flags a few days ago. They're very useful. Now my fiddling with the BIND port is reduced to making stuff live under /var/namedb instead of /etc/namedb as I like having / mounted read-only as much as possible. - Philip -- Philip Paeps Please don't CC me, I am philip@paeps.cx subscribed to the list. BOFH Excuse #193: Did you pay the new Support Fee? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message