> On Jan 12, 2018, at 4:12 PM, Thorsten Kukuk <kukuk@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 12, Chuck Lever wrote: > >>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 1:05 PM, Guillem Jover <gjover@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> [F] <https://sources.debian.org/src/glibc/2.26-3/debian/patches/any/local-bindresvport_blacklist.diff/> >>> >>> On the above Debian bug report, it was proposed to make libtirpc switch >>> to use the libc bindresvport() implementation so that at least on those >>> distributions where it is locally patched it would honor the >>> /etc/bindresvport.blacklist file. The problem with this, is of course >>> that it does not help any upstream code on any other non-patched system. >> >> The community issue here is that there have evolved, over time, >> multiple RPC libraries with divergent capabilities. The only way >> to truly address this confusion is to eliminate all but one of >> them, which is far outside the scope of your bug fix. For now we >> have to live with it. > > openSUSE is removing sunrpc from glibc, Fedora seems to be removing > sunrpc from glibc, so it's only a matter of time when libtirpc is the > only RPC implementation used on Linux. There are other RPC implementations, for example: - The nonstandard TI-RPC library used internally by Ganesha - The RPC librar(ies) buried in Kerberos implementations So there's more to do than simply removing the one in glibc, unfortunately. -- Chuck Lever -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
