I will try this out shortly

Ideally we can get this committed and MFC'd, with a goal of including it in 11.4.

Go for it!

Seems reasonable as a first step. Do we address the python issue with this change?

Further discussion leaves me content with this patch, without a a sysctl to revert to the old behaviour.

overall LGTM

Sounds good to me, we'll want to submit this upstream with a test case.

In D24773#545294, @cem wrote:

There is no transition guide and I'm sure Microsoft has been publishing a deprecation guide on SMB1 for a decade. SMB1 is just very dead and we don't have any SMB2+ support. Users could try fusefs-netsmbfs but I have no idea how well it works.

https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/storage-at-microsoft/stop-using-smb1/ba-p/425858

In D24773#545252, @cem wrote:

It feels like this is a strong signal we should kill netsmb, or at least disable its build. Windows is (happily) increasingly unwilling to serve SMB1 and our smbfs does not support anything else.

exp-run in PR205250

In D24760#545153, @gordon wrote:

Have we checked to see how often this is used in tree?

👍

@kevans upstream patch now committed as rS360801

Hmm, I think if USE_BINUTILS is already there no change should be needed. Is it possible USE_BINUTILS was added after the last exp-run (which was some time ago)? Let me try building without any change.

In D24739#544699, @acm wrote:

is it replacing USE_BINUTILS? lang/fpc has it into Makefile file

Thanks for the comments - I've updated the version in my tree, and will commit to tools/ soon. We can iterate on it from there.

In D24739#544691, @lwhsu wrote:

In D24739#544688, @emaste wrote:

In D24739#544504, @lwhsu wrote:

PORTREVISION needs increasing.

I asked @bapt about it and this should be a nop if as already exists (libxine notwithstanding) so bump not necessary - agreed?

Agree. I was also on the fence of bumping it or not. It is nop for non-CURRENT branches. I was afraid that a -CURRENT user installed them before as removed from the base, and then it becomes unusable, and because there is no newer version of the port so they will not know the extra dependency needs installing. I think this case is somehow rare and the -CURRENT users should have knowledge to fix them by updating ports tree and reinstall them.

In D24739#544504, @lwhsu wrote:

PORTREVISION needs increasing.

per discussion with bapt we will just add objdump:devel/binutils dep

In D24728#544282, @emaste wrote:

but did it this way on request not to bring along the dependency when not required.

That's fine; I originally thought it'd be fine to unconditionally add the dependency and just bring in binutils on all FreeBSD releases, but did it this way on request not to bring along the dependency when not required.

I'll need a review and explicit approval from a ports committer (as I do not have a ports bit) - please add an explicit "Approved by" tag once we have a committable version.

Seems reasonable to me; I would suggest that we turn it on by default in HEAD to get some more mileage on it

Posted initially for discussion, not a final committable change.

I don't think there's a great deal of merit in adding this change just to pander to broken apps

I wonder if we could introduce this with a sysctl at first, shipping 13 with this proposed functionality by default but the option to revert, and then remove the option later?

OK