Re: Retiring lpr and lpd

On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 at 22:20, Marco Moock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 21.02.2026 12:43 Adrian Chadd <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In fact, the challenge I've seen in us moving stuff into ports is
> > that it then DOESN'T work, and then when someone (eg me) needs it, it
> > turns out it builds, it ships but it's broken.
>
> Can you give examples here?
>
> I use a few packages from ports (I only use the prebuilt binaries using
> pkg) and didn't encounter that yet. If there are issues, the
> maintainers replied and fixed them.

Sure! the rlogin/rsh port is broken because it still uses PATH_RLOGIN
which points
to /usr/bin, but the port installs stuff into /usr/local/bin/. There's
also some holdover
exec related stuff that uses PATH_RSH in libc, and it likely should be fixed or
deprecated.

(Yes I found myself needing rsh/rlogin to talk to ye olde computers.
It's a thing.)

There's a PR up in the relevant github project and I'll poke it next week.

I'm all for putting deprecated parts of the codebase into ports, but
it's not always
a completely free conversion / ride. :)



-adrian