Re: trpt(8) to be decomissioned

On 2022-11-04 09:40, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> Max,
> 
> the reason I want to retire it is not that it consumes 40 Kb
> in the repository.  The reason is that knows kernel structures,
> and fails to compile after changes to them.  So the tool that
> nobody uses requires special care when working on TCP.  The
> kernel headers disclose the structures for trpt (with some
> protection with _WANT_TCPCB, though) and some software from
> ports (not calling names!) would start use them too. Now a
> kernel developer needs to care not only about trpt, but
> about this software, too.
> 
> On the kernel side there is also TCPDEBUG code that needs
> to be kept compilable, while apparently nobody uses it.
While I really hate hearing that small utils
(almost elegant in their simplicity) that have worked perfectly
well for a great many years must be kicked to the curb. I guess
I can see your point. However I think TCPDEBUG affects a great
deal more that trpt(8). I hope your not implying that it should
go as well.

> 
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 07:19:19AM +0000, Max Baroi wrote:
> M> I'm sorry if this is an inappropriate suggestion, but I think it would be 
> neat
> if there was a place in the ports hierarchy for retired programs like trpt. 
> Maybe
> a "historical" or "archival" directory for programs phased out of from base,
> especially ones that are almost four decades old.
> M>
> M> -Max
> M>
> M> Nov 3, 2022 11:04:07 PM Mike Karels <mike@karels.net>:
> M>
> M> > On 3 Nov 2022, at 22:48, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> M> >
> M> >>   Hi,
> M> >>
> M> >> trpt(8) is utility to pull TCP debugging data from the kernel
> M> >> in 4.2BSD. We still have it in the base, with corresponding
> M> >> TCPDEBUG option in the kernel and SO_DEBUG socket option.
> M> >>
> M> >> At the same time we have much more powerful debugging facilities
> M> >> for TCP, e.g. the Dtrace probing, the TCP black box logging and
> M> >> siftr.  These are the tools that modern developers use.
modern developer(s): those whom create things that scratch their itch,
without looking hard enough to see that something else was already available. 
;-)

> M> >>
> M> >> Already touched this topic with rscheff@, tuexen@, rrs@ and jtl@.
> M> >> None of them new what trpt(8) is :) Looks like a good justification
> M> >> to me.
> M> >
> M> > I have used trpt, but not for many years.  It was done before tcpdump
> M> > as well.  Its time has long since gone.
> M> >
> M> >         Mike
> M> >> --
> M> >> Gleb Smirnoff
> M>
> M>
--chris