Provide a new offering

Take

This patch is a good effort. Let's keep building upon it and get it ready for when head is thawed on Sep 23. Thank you for resurrecting this topic.

The patch is showing usr.sbin/certctl/trustctl.sh -- is this a phab issue or did the file not get renamed in the patch?

Template suggestion because file is pretty large

Hope this helps

Corrections

Thank you so much for your work on this. It is very much appreciated.

I would just like to comment for the record that I wish there was more time before the 12.0 release so that I could have created dwatch profiles to simplify tapping into these new hooks. I don't have enough time to develop that before 12.0 is completely frozen.

Please run igor -Dgpxy on the manual changes. OK to ignore any nits it complains about that you didn't introduce yourself.

Additional comments following an update

Ping. Is the GNUmakefiles that are an issue? I gues I can host those in my forked OS, but I sincerely believe the other changes are good because it allows people to take the source code from FreeBSD and compile it without modification (assuming they have something like the included GNUmakefiles)

Ping. Reasons for having this in base are similar to basic reasoning for jot, seq, and other argument processing/generating utilities. cmb fills a gap in UNIX that should have been filled decades ago but nobody gave the effort (I suspect because it is a very difficult problem to solve; and given the complexity required, I can absolutely see why nobody has ever BSD-licensed such a tool).

In D16377#347691, @tuexen wrote:

In D16377#347679, @dteske wrote:

Can you expand your patch to include the creation of a corresponding dwatch module? It's easy ...

cd cddl/usr.sbin/dwatch/libexec
sed -e 's/udp/&lite/g;s/length/coverage/g' udp > udplite
echo "$( awk '(line=$1)||1;NF==2&&sub(/udp/,"&lite");/^LINKS/&&gsub(/udp/,"&lite"){_[n++]=$0}/udplite-send/{for(x=0;x<n;)print _[x++]}' Makefile )" > Makefile

Not that easy:

tuexen@head:~/head/cddl/usr.sbin/dwatch/libexec % echo "$( awk '(line=$1)||1;NF==2&&sub(/udp/,"&lite");/^LINKS/&&gsub(/udp/,"&lite"){_[n++]=$0}/udplite-send/{for(x=0;x<n;)print _[x++]}' Makefile )" > Makefile
Illegal variable name.

Can you expand your patch to include the creation of a corresponding dwatch module? It's easy ...

Worth mentioning, I tested on stable/11 (for MFC consideration).

Testing was successful. Everything worked as expected. Cheers.

Aside from testing with what comes with FreeBSD base, I also wanted to make sure that this change would be handled well by my DTrace network visualizer (sysutils/dwatch-gource in ports).

I have used both your attached udpio.d (taken from dtrace_udp(4) in the EXAMPLES section) as well as:

Removed bapt and closed (was already committed but not closed because phab bugette)

In D16046#346970, @tuexen wrote:

@dteske Did you had a chance to test it?

If it's OK, I'd like to run some tests with dwatch to make sure that I don't need to patch my code for any change in functionality. I don't suspect this to be the case, but just want to make sure. If you're fine to wait another day or two for my testing, I'll definitely stamp approval

Update diff to just the low-hanging (non-vendor) changes

In D16025#339497, @danfe wrote:

I would like an opinion on which ones should be fixed and which should perhaps be left alone.

I'd like every one of them to ultimately be fixed. Fix the low-hanging ones first. Submit patches to the vendors of the code we're using, make sure that they apply it.

API ones are the hardest. Those that are private or internal to FreeBSD should be fixed I think. For public ones that could be used by the rest of the world we should probably follow our usual deprecation routine.

I think this is a bug in phabricator. The review was in "closed" state and committed. Then a comment caused it to go back into "Needs Review". The person that added the comment (antoine) even came back and accepted and it still shows as "Needs Review". Can't close this ticket until it is in approved. I'd rather not use the sledgehammer of removing all the reviewers.

@antoine can you accept so I can close?

In D15875#340577, @antoine wrote:

It could be PKGNAMESUFFIX= -shell or PKGNAMESUFFIX= -fraubsd

Been thinking about this for the past day. I can't think of any suitable value for either prefix or suffix. I'm open to suggestions -- perhaps you've delt with this in the past and have a suggestion for suitable value when this occurs.

In D15875#339613, @imp wrote:

I wouldn't worry about it...

In D16025#339327, @sbruno wrote:

Hrm. Phabricator seems to think there's no context for your diff here. What's that all about?

Turns out they only look similar. download forwards to HTTPS and http://ftp.freebsd.org/ also has a different structure to access the data. For example, on download, the releases are in /ftp/releases/ while on http://ftp.freebsd.org/ the releases are in /pub/FreeBSD/releases/

To prevent the "This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state Needs Review." moniker being attached to this review, can you re-approve?

Add sysutils/Makefile modification

Blocked by pre-commit hook:

Add sysutils/Makefile modification