On 20 March 2014 13:55, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-- Hi,
So as an innocent bystander who happens to be reading along this thread,
On 03/20/2014 07:45 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 20.03.14 14:31, Martin Langhoff (martin.langhoff@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Lennart Poettering <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder whether it wouldn't be time to say goodbye to tcpwrappers in
>>> Fedora. There has been a request in systemd upstream to disable support
>>>
>>
>> As Stephen points out, they are used. Does systemd+xinetd match their
>> functionality?
>
> No. systemd is not a firewall. It currently supports libwrap checks for
> socket activated services. And I'd really like to get rid of that...
>
> I have no doubt that some people use them, however I am also pretty sure
> that they are massively awful, and not worth the trouble, and that I'd
> prefer not to see this crap in the default install. However, since the
> library is currently hooked into a lot of services (starting with
> systemd itself) I currently cannot do "rpm -e".
>
> I mean, I really don't mind that tcpd/tcpwrap stays in the archives, if
> people want to make use of that. I am simply proposing to not link
> agains them anymore for everything that is in the default system.
I see 2 sides to the story here:
Lennart says:
1) It is horrible code
2) It really really is horrible horrible code
3) And there are other ways to achieve the same goal, so lets kill it
Others say:
1) There may be other ways but non so easily central managed with with
a unified syntax for all services
The argument which the others are making actually sounds a lot like
a lot of the arguments in favor of systemd (wrt standardizing, etc.).
And I'm getting the feeling that Lennart is not as much opposed to the
functionality of tcp-wrappers, as that he *really* hates the code.
So maybe a solution would be to write a libwrap2 instead ?
So offer something with equivalent functionality (and config file
syntax compatibility), with a nice modern clean API and then systemd
and others can be moved over to that 1 by 1, and once we've no more
users left we can kill of the old beast ?
Note I've nothing to do with anything in this discussion, but I
just noticed a certain trend in it and I hope the above may lead
to a more fruitful discussion.
Yes I agree Hans. I think this is the rational and correct course. I also realize that it isn't Lennart's job to do so even if I wish he would.
Stephen J Smoogen.
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
