[arch-dev-public] Questionable apps in core/support
I just came across a couple of things in core/support that seemed odd to me, and wanted to ask you guys what you thought: support was intended to be apps which "help out" or "support" the rest of core - like when installing and things like that. a) screen While this is an important app, sure, does it belong in core? b) hdparm and sdparm I don't see how these work in "support" - as the very least I'd put them at the same mental level as acpi and pm-utils c) openswan/openvpn/vpnc I'm on the fence here. I mean, I could see VPN connections being needed at some point during an install or something of the sort, but at the same time, why do we have 3 VPN apps there? Anyone want to clarify or give me your opinions here?
a) screen While this is an important app, sure, does it belong in core?
Probably not. Useful, but not normally used till after an install and should be OK in extra.
b) hdparm and sdparm I don't see how these work in "support" - as the very least I'd put them at the same mental level as acpi and pm-utils
Some drives/controllers used to required forcing modes with hdparm to get decent performance (think install taking 2 days). Not sure if this is still an issue.
c) openswan/openvpn/vpnc I'm on the fence here. I mean, I could see VPN connections being needed at some point during an install or something of the sort, but at the same time, why do we have 3 VPN apps there?
openswan does ipsec based VPN openvpn does SSL/TLS based VPN vpnc does cisco based VPN Not saying that they should be in core, but if we deem that one should be, they all should be. Dale
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 01:59:44PM -0500, Dale Blount wrote:
a) screen While this is an important app, sure, does it belong in core?
Probably not. Useful, but not normally used till after an install and should be OK in extra.
b) hdparm and sdparm I don't see how these work in "support" - as the very least I'd put them at the same mental level as acpi and pm-utils
Some drives/controllers used to required forcing modes with hdparm to get decent performance (think install taking 2 days). Not sure if this is still an issue.
Wow... probably something on more dedicated hardware than just standard beige boxes...
c) openswan/openvpn/vpnc I'm on the fence here. I mean, I could see VPN connections being needed at some point during an install or something of the sort, but at the same time, why do we have 3 VPN apps there?
openswan does ipsec based VPN openvpn does SSL/TLS based VPN vpnc does cisco based VPN
Not saying that they should be in core, but if we deem that one should be, they all should be.
I would agree that I don't think these are really supposed to be in core. If any were to stay in core, I'd put vpn in there. Call me silly, but at one point I had a vpn'd wireless network to give access to the LAN. Jason
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Dale Blount wrote:
a) screen While this is an important app, sure, does it belong in core?
Probably not. Useful, but not normally used till after an install and should be OK in extra.
If no one objects, I'll move screen to extra this week-end. Eric -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Aaron Griffin wrote:
I just came across a couple of things in core/support that seemed odd to me, and wanted to ask you guys what you thought:
support was intended to be apps which "help out" or "support" the rest of core - like when installing and things like that.
Hmm, yes.. but is it not also about providing network access by all available means? If I wanted to reinstall my laptop right now, I would need vpn support to get to the net.
c) openswan/openvpn/vpnc I'm on the fence here. I mean, I could see VPN connections being needed at some point during an install or something of the sort, but at the same time, why do we have 3 VPN apps there?
As Dale mentions, these are three distinct vpn flavours. I requested the inclusion of openswan in core for that very reason. If we're going to support one in core, we should support them all. T.
On Nov 29, 2007 2:53 AM, Tom K
Aaron Griffin wrote:
I just came across a couple of things in core/support that seemed odd to me, and wanted to ask you guys what you thought:
support was intended to be apps which "help out" or "support" the rest of core - like when installing and things like that.
Hmm, yes.. but is it not also about providing network access by all available means? If I wanted to reinstall my laptop right now, I would need vpn support to get to the net.
Yeah, that's what I was unsure of. The question in my head was "is it possible you NEED a vpn connection to get network access". I always thought of it as more of a supplemental/nice-to-have thing. Never used it seriously outside of "connect to work from home".
c) openswan/openvpn/vpnc I'm on the fence here. I mean, I could see VPN connections being needed at some point during an install or something of the sort, but at the same time, why do we have 3 VPN apps there?
As Dale mentions, these are three distinct vpn flavours. I requested the inclusion of openswan in core for that very reason. If we're going to support one in core, we should support them all.
I was actually not aware these were all different. That sucks that we need 3 apps to do the same thing with slight differences, but oh well. I'm sated on the VPN issue, they're annoying, but fine as someone may need VPN access to install, and we can't predict which VPN flavor they'd need.
Aaron Griffin schrieb:
Yeah, that's what I was unsure of. The question in my head was "is it possible you NEED a vpn connection to get network access". I always thought of it as more of a supplemental/nice-to-have thing. Never used it seriously outside of "connect to work from home".
That actually happens quite often. Until a few months ago, the only way to get online via my university's wireless was to use a VPN - and it would be well possible that this is someone's only internet connection. After installing from a core cd, one would want to go oline.
c) openswan/openvpn/vpnc
I am not sure why we have openswan there and not ipsec-tools, but I don't know much about ipsec anyway, I always failed in using it. openvpn is a free VPN solution similar to ipsec, but much easier to set up (for both server and client). It is widely used for VPNs. vpnc is an open source replacement for the Cisco VPN Client. You can connect to Cisco 3000 and similar concentrators. The protocol is based on ipsec, but has some proprietary enhancements in authentication. This is what my university uses.
Thomas Bächler wrote:
I am not sure why we have openswan there and not ipsec-tools, but I don't know much about ipsec anyway, I always failed in using it.
Because I'm the only IPSec-using dev, and I use Openswan. :)
On Sun, 2007-12-02 at 16:40 +0000, Tom K wrote:
Thomas Bächler wrote:
I am not sure why we have openswan there and not ipsec-tools, but I don't know much about ipsec anyway, I always failed in using it.
Because I'm the only IPSec-using dev, and I use Openswan. :)
I use openswan too, but on openwrt, not Arch. I know that won't help when it comes to testing the package but I might be able to answer non-distro specific questions about it. Dale
participants (6)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Dale Blount
-
Eric Belanger
-
Jason Chu
-
Thomas Bächler
-
Tom K