From nobody Thu Oct 28 14:44:56 2021 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@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 6F6EA1819999; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 14:45:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-io1-f46.google.com (mail-io1-f46.google.com [209.85.166.46]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Hg7dT47qcz3kqT; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 14:45:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-io1-f46.google.com with SMTP id d63so8443708iof.4; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 07:45:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=zfpPey5TjcpLI+WDp1UlCDbBe50UA4QULCo25k6u6UM=; b=2GGfr4dKUp464nYckWMpVq1BJ1lnvGBDk7XAAIXTX5qokIHmM+CBOc18XGNOEWtw7/ S9BQCR6PLs8mZmxYjIYUWMx7XJRtHItxDvEha+1Wo7336QMw/H46RpQIssuodRn4BcvZ 694TcFrg4K/KPapENpLqeInTN0jcaBWmdr/i8RCfS44tkMKvVEXSnGbZtIUQ1YGmSZdp Z5NG99QL4jkb6Rf4Q60BAvRuYlciBtepg0CB3MzCRlqjEbiIOD/BckTJ7yhri54NapOU ta+GLkL/BeMtHoOEgoCZWH+JxW03m6k9RRIxtfA5MWg3n5RJAoUC8l81vZjjFzlVXTtU VbAA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532r9UxutFSNEqoyGRnImtlltVGJkZa6dZ/8lp7Me28l7/dXhqJE raoR8k+h1Vy+x6XwKppr9ByJduq+D4i8mK7Njf9R/8hpDsk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwtFj/iwJ8hZQoyItxZpg5b8I11qGVp+TMZN0gWT8ssfAIqvuQs1cJEQZazEhAT/dD/9RTtjTasSuPIkfFMlII= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:1311:: with SMTP id r17mr1607142jad.76.1635432311105; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 07:45:11 -0700 (PDT) List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Ed Maste Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 10:44:56 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Deprecating smbfs(5) and removing it before FreeBSD 14 To: FreeBSD Current , freebsd-stable stable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Hg7dT47qcz3kqT X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of carpeddiem@gmail.com designates 209.85.166.46 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=carpeddiem@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.26 / 15.00]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[carpeddiem]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.68)[0.678]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.94)[-0.938]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[209.85.166.46:from]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[209.85.166.46:from]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N The smbfs(5) filesystem supports only the obsolete SMBv1 protocol, and I propose removing it for FreeBSD 14. I know the CHERI folks have been using it but they plan to migrate away from it. It was broken for months before they fixed it, so I suspect nobody is using it on contemporary releases. I have review D32707 (https://reviews.freebsd.org/D32707) open to add this deprecation notice to the man page: The smbfs filesystem driver supports only the obsolete SMBv1 protocol. smbfs and userspace counterparts smbutil(1) and mount_smbfs(8) are not present in FreeBSD 14 and above. Users are advised to evaluate the sysutils/fusefs-smbnetfs port instead. A similar notice would be added to the smbutil and mount_smbfs man pages, and manu@ suggested having the userland utilities emit a warning when they are used. I am interested in comments, objections, or reports that anyone is in fact using smbfs.