What to do about rcmdsh(3) ?

[O'Connor, Daniel]

> On 27 Jun 2018, at 13:01, Eitan Adler <lists at eitanadler.com> wrote:
> 
> On 24 June 2018 at 05:14, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 03:32:13AM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote:
>>> Now that the rcmds are removed from base, it opens a question about
>>> what to do with rcmdsh(3).
>>> This is documented as
>>>     rcmdsh ??? return a stream to a remote command without superuser
>>> And is implemented as a rather simple wrapper of getaddrinfo and exec.
>>> 
>>> This isn't something I'd imagine we'd add to libc now-a-days and is
>>> currently broken by default (due to defaulting to _PATH_RSH)
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure there is much value in keeping this function around. I
>>> did a rather naive search for uses of this function in ports and
>>> couldn't find any. I'm preparing a more comprehensive patch for an
>>> exp-run.
>> There is a huge value in keeping ABI compatibility.  The symbol must be kept.
>> You may remove default version for the symbol if you are so inclined.
> 
> I'm new at this. How does one do that?

You could just leave the call, I assume it will fail with an error if rsh isn't in the path.

If a user desperately needs it then they can install an rsh from ports (or something).

--
Daniel O'Connor
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
 -- Andrew Tanenbaum