Re: [HEADSUP] Deprecation of the ftp support in pkg
- In reply to: Alexander Leidinger : "Re: [HEADSUP] Deprecation of the ftp support in pkg"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 08:40:15 UTC
On 2022-01-23 23:06, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Quoting "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de> (from Sun, 23 Jan 2022 > 19:19:57 +0100): > >>> Am 22.01.2022 um 09:35 schrieb Chris <portmaster@bsdforge.com>: >>> I find it's less "housekeeping" to use ftp(1) setup through inetd(8) for >>> pkg repos, than >>> via ssh. >> >> I understand the appeal of FTP. >> Maybe this discussion is focusing on the wrong topic. Perhaps >> we should consider including a light weight way to serve HTTP(S) >> in base? Like Lighttpd, which as far as I know comes with a BSD >> 3-clause equivalent license. >> >> But then the general tendency has been to remove network services >> from base rather than introduce them. Like e.g. BIND. >> >> So I really have no idea what the general opinion is, just wanted >> to throw in that IMHO HTTPS is the best protocol to the task and >> if some way to serve that could be included in base, I for one would >> appreciate that. > > Personally I think that a http(s) server is not needed in base, as long as > we > don't need it for something in base (and I wouldn't mind if ftpd would get > removed from base for the same reason). Installing a package is easy enough > (no > matter if for http or ftp). > > I think in this thread it was mentioned that someone didn't want to install > 3rd > party software for this. I still can't wrap my head around that part...: It's not the removal from base || adding 3rd party "stuff". It's the removal of the *ability* to *use* ftp(1) as a transport with pkg(8). > - we talk about a tool which is used to exclusively install 3rd party > software (pkg) > - this tool itself is installed like a 3rd party software (package/port, > the > system-pkg is only a bootstrap) > - and the complete context is serving 3rd party software from a tool which > builds 3rd party software locally (poudriere) or at least a downloaded > subset > from FreeBSD > - poudriere is also not in the base system but installed like a 3rd party > software > - maintaining a list of software you are interested in (be it for > poudriere or > for automated downloads of FreeBSD packages into a local repo) seems more > effort > to me, than setting up one more 3rd party software for local file > distribution > > I wanted to propose here to include config snippeds for apache/nginx/thttp > for > such an use-case to decrease the configuration burden, but this seems to be > already the case (at least for nginx/apache). I can't see within 30sec any > docs > about this in the poudriere wiki, so maybe adding a prominent pointer to it > there > might be an improvement? > > Bye, > Alexander. -- Chris