From nobody Wed Sep 21 21:55:36 2022 X-Original-To: dev-commits-src-all@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4MXsfh104rz4cRVg; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:55:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@cschubert.com) Received: from omta001.cacentral1.a.cloudfilter.net (omta001.cacentral1.a.cloudfilter.net [3.97.99.32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Client", Issuer "CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4MXsfg6sFQz3tw4; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:55:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@cschubert.com) Received: from shw-obgw-4001a.ext.cloudfilter.net ([10.228.9.142]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id b1ReonnkcS8Wrb7gxohTxd; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:55:39 +0000 Received: from spqr.komquats.com ([70.66.148.124]) by cmsmtp with ESMTPA id b7guoYDGslahmb7gvoQH7N; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:55:39 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=d8PmdDvE c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=632b885b a=Cwc3rblV8FOMdVN/wOAqyQ==:117 a=Cwc3rblV8FOMdVN/wOAqyQ==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=xOM3xZuef0cA:10 a=YxBL1-UpAAAA:8 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=EkcXrb_YAAAA:8 a=LCEh4koYiSY__6AaQE0A:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=Ia-lj3WSrqcvXOmTRaiG:22 a=IjZwj45LgO3ly-622nXo:22 a=LK5xJRSDVpKd5WXXoEvA:22 Received: from slippy.cwsent.com (slippy [10.1.1.91]) by spqr.komquats.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD2674A7; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:55:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by slippy.cwsent.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 886F9212; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:55:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.9.0 11/07/2018 with nmh-1.7+dev Reply-to: Cy Schubert From: Cy Schubert X-os: FreeBSD X-Sender: cy@cwsent.com X-URL: http://www.cschubert.com/ To: Shawn Webb cc: Gleb Smirnoff , Mike Karels , Cy Schubert , Brooks Davis , src-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 24e1824e4646 - main - Deprecate telnet daemon In-reply-to: <20220921214546.426y6o4jpnsfsa2l@mutt-hbsd> References: <202209211517.28LFHkoJ089471@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <20220921163951.17C77AC@slippy.cwsent.com> <8EC34FC3-F299-4B03-AD4E-83D062D0E9F6@karels.net> <20220921214546.426y6o4jpnsfsa2l@mutt-hbsd> Comments: In-reply-to Shawn Webb message dated "Wed, 21 Sep 2022 17:45:46 -0400." List-Id: Commit messages for all branches of the src repository List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/dev-commits-src-all List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:55:36 -0700 Message-Id: <20220921215536.886F9212@slippy.cwsent.com> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfL4oQ5WKLj0sI0gtB/lF+FLwZ4UJx3dScBA7zPgMxYPZrwYr/5rl80RNeEJdSbgxIJEIeyFB2vM09M/8c1jbBbCoJ8nTeten6rkn6bZoYnL2t8gd3APF ksok1l9K2qe+2SdTkrX6/gLcEe4swIQiUdHHvvmIPNqjiXoEeENkpIajwxYqAXKnioppcnm+dQxDKQUQXB70Aft61XZr//Z7zY/8wuAb+ismm6iPOvtr9g+M +qmMB6rnTjTTuRLAmgmDpPPOlek2O5kns3BereZ9DMxHq7l4SSzZQu54M5Rt4inS0GtfbqM9dkv1STo8zj91cW8Q73aMjMoUXvZYIKvhRmwqOVcKbzNbVJp1 waT59YbuJj9mseBeAnxgkdx0sLz2LOGvRsIepnT/WBQQWouNiDp8IQ7fyCiyytLWL+5tT8dbRmyCik2H8IfskcJ9SNHPuw== X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4MXsfg6sFQz3tw4 X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N In message <20220921214546.426y6o4jpnsfsa2l@mutt-hbsd>, Shawn Webb writes: > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 02:11:44PM -0700, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > Mike, > >=20 > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 01:02:17PM -0500, Mike Karels wrote: > > M> I have no problem with deprecating (or removing) telnetd in base. I > > M> think the client should remain, though. I use it frequently, although > > M> not on the telnet port. ftp* are another issue; anonymous FTP is a > > M> perfectly reasonable usage. I use it to download FreeBSD images often. > >=20 > > Is there any service where telnet to a port would be preferred over nc(1)? > > I wonder if it would be worthwhile to hardlink telnet(1) to nc(1). No. Though nc -t is supposed to be compatible with telnet, it is not. No sense fooling people into thinking nc, even with the -t argument, is the same as telnet. It is not and it will be the source of many PRs which will eventually waste developer's time making nc behave just like telnet does. It is better to simply move it to ports for those who absolutely need it. -- Cheers, Cy Schubert FreeBSD UNIX: Web: http://www.FreeBSD.org NTP: Web: https://nwtime.org e^(i*pi)+1=0