3 ms·

Installation instructions: ftp https://raw.githubusercontent.com/segaboy/vulkan-netbsd/main/scripts/setup-env.sh !^^^^^! That's... a bit unorthodox

Installation instructions: ftp https://raw.githubusercontent.com/segaboy/vulkan-netbsd/main/scripts/setup-env.sh !^^^^^! That's... a bit unorthodox. FreeBSD has a `fetch`[1] utility for this, I wasn't aware NetBSD puts that in `ftp`[2]. Interesting choice. I wonder what led to it. [1] https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?fetch https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?fetch [2] https://man.netbsd.org/ftp.1 https://man.netbsd.org/ftp.1

iberator 3mo ago
Oldest supported machine for NetBSD is VAX 780 from 1978(!!!). One of the first system supporting mmu, 32 bit cpu, virtual memory etc etc This machine is so slow that it takes a lot of time to generate ssh keys etc. We talking here hours hehe NetBSD is known to support like 60 architectures - many of them low end embedded systems: so ftp AS A CHOICE (you have other options!) is very smart and easy
- spijdar 3mo ago
  I think GP is confused why the ftp command also handles http(s) :) I hate to imagine what a 780 running NetBSD would be like, too. I tried netbooting NetBSD on my MicroVAX 3400, which is about 2.5x the performance of the 780. It did, literally, take 6+ hours to slog through making RSA keys.
  - kevin_thibedeau 3mo ago
    Elliptic curve key gen is much faster on slow hardware. You're waiting around on primality tests that aren't necessary with modern keys.
    - spijdar 3mo ago
      Yep, it's a loooot faster. But then, when you decide to boot NetBSD on these boxes, you're not really doing it for practical reasons anyway, so part of the experience is waiting a few hours for /etc/rc.d/sshd to do its thing. Probably more relevant on more "borderline" hosts. My SPARCstation 2 can just barely run NetBSD 10 at what I'd call "tolerable speeds" for some concept of "real work", and it's something like 50x the speed of the 780!
      - anthk 3mo ago
        Disable some booted services at /etc/rc.conf: https://luke8086.dev/netbsd-on-thinkpad-380z.html https://luke8086.dev/netbsd-on-thinkpad-380z.html
  - klibertp 3mo ago
    > I think GP is confused why the ftp command also handles http(s) :) Exactly - I even suspected for a second that `ftp` on NetBSD is something else entirely, not an actual FTP client with HTTP/HTTPS URLs bolted on. It's not - it still accepts a host as an argument and opens a CLI if there's an FTP server to talk to.
    - saidnooneever 3mo ago
      maybe rather than protocol its program. then it all makes sense no. File Transfer Program. voila.
  - anthk 3mo ago
    Easier with SIMH.
yjftsjthsd-h 3mo ago
I dunno, that feels very BSD to me. Presumably, they had a ftp utility first, and then when somebody wanted to download files over http they looked around and decided that the obvious thing to do was to add it to the existing file transfer/download program. Same as continuing to add functions to ifconfig rather than inventing a new ip tool.
- dessimus 3mo ago
  Sure, if those functions added were related to configuring network interfaces, but it would be odd if someone added functions for configuring storage controllers.
  - lmm 3mo ago
    Imagine using an ftp program to transfer files.
    - dessimus 3mo ago
      BitTorrent transfers files, so should a BT client be bolted on too? Typically the Unix philosophy has been do one thing well, not do all the things.
      - yjftsjthsd-h 3mo ago
        The sticking point is always what "one thing" is. I can certainly see an argument for "download a file over http" (or, for another program, ftp), but I can also see an argument for "download files over the internet". In which case, honestly the only reason I'd even quirk an eyebrow at a BSD's ftp(1) adding bittorrent support is that bittorrent usually means running a daemon that that does feel out of character for it. But even then I wouldn't be that surprised to see it added.
JdeBP 3mo ago
Actually, it's orthodox; and it's fetch that isn't. FreeBSD is actually the odd one out, for having an extra tool for doing the same thing. The ftp tool in all of the BSDs, including FreeBSD, speaks HTTP, and has done since Luke Mewburn did lukemftp (later to be named tnftp) and Theo de Raadt did likewise, both based on the original 4.2BSD ftp, back in the middle 1990s. * https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/contrib/tnftp/ChangeLog#n1792 https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/contrib/tnftp/ChangeLog#n1... * https://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/usr.bin/ftp/main.c?rev=1.16 https://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/usr.bin/ftp/main.c?... * https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/log/src/usr.bin/ftp/main.c,v?sort=File#rev1.6 https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/log/src/usr.bin/ftp/main.c,v?sort...
- klibertp 3mo ago
  Nice! Thank you, that explains it. FreeBSD was my first *BSD and the only one I had long-term contact with, so I unconsciously use it as my "BSD standard". My bad on that :)

iberator 3mo ago

Oldest supported machine for NetBSD is VAX 780 from 1978(!!!). One of the first system supporting mmu, 32 bit cpu, virtual memory etc etc This machine is so slow that it takes a lot of time to generate ssh keys etc. We talking here hours hehe NetBSD is known to support like 60 architectures - many of them low end embedded systems: so ftp AS A CHOICE (you have other options!) is very smart and easy

spijdar 3mo ago
I think GP is confused why the ftp command also handles http(s) :) I hate to imagine what a 780 running NetBSD would be like, too. I tried netbooting NetBSD on my MicroVAX 3400, which is about 2.5x the performance of the 780. It did, literally, take 6+ hours to slog through making RSA keys.
- kevin_thibedeau 3mo ago
  Elliptic curve key gen is much faster on slow hardware. You're waiting around on primality tests that aren't necessary with modern keys.
  - spijdar 3mo ago
    Yep, it's a loooot faster. But then, when you decide to boot NetBSD on these boxes, you're not really doing it for practical reasons anyway, so part of the experience is waiting a few hours for /etc/rc.d/sshd to do its thing. Probably more relevant on more "borderline" hosts. My SPARCstation 2 can just barely run NetBSD 10 at what I'd call "tolerable speeds" for some concept of "real work", and it's something like 50x the speed of the 780!
    - anthk 3mo ago
      Disable some booted services at /etc/rc.conf: https://luke8086.dev/netbsd-on-thinkpad-380z.html https://luke8086.dev/netbsd-on-thinkpad-380z.html
- klibertp 3mo ago
  > I think GP is confused why the ftp command also handles http(s) :) Exactly - I even suspected for a second that `ftp` on NetBSD is something else entirely, not an actual FTP client with HTTP/HTTPS URLs bolted on. It's not - it still accepts a host as an argument and opens a CLI if there's an FTP server to talk to.
  - saidnooneever 3mo ago
    maybe rather than protocol its program. then it all makes sense no. File Transfer Program. voila.
- anthk 3mo ago
  Easier with SIMH.

yjftsjthsd-h 3mo ago

I dunno, that feels very BSD to me. Presumably, they had a ftp utility first, and then when somebody wanted to download files over http they looked around and decided that the obvious thing to do was to add it to the existing file transfer/download program. Same as continuing to add functions to ifconfig rather than inventing a new ip tool.

dessimus 3mo ago
Sure, if those functions added were related to configuring network interfaces, but it would be odd if someone added functions for configuring storage controllers.
- lmm 3mo ago
  Imagine using an ftp program to transfer files.
  - dessimus 3mo ago
    BitTorrent transfers files, so should a BT client be bolted on too? Typically the Unix philosophy has been do one thing well, not do all the things.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 3mo ago
      The sticking point is always what "one thing" is. I can certainly see an argument for "download a file over http" (or, for another program, ftp), but I can also see an argument for "download files over the internet". In which case, honestly the only reason I'd even quirk an eyebrow at a BSD's ftp(1) adding bittorrent support is that bittorrent usually means running a daemon that that does feel out of character for it. But even then I wouldn't be that surprised to see it added.

JdeBP 3mo ago

Actually, it's orthodox; and it's fetch that isn't. FreeBSD is actually the odd one out, for having an extra tool for doing the same thing. The ftp tool in all of the BSDs, including FreeBSD, speaks HTTP, and has done since Luke Mewburn did lukemftp (later to be named tnftp) and Theo de Raadt did likewise, both based on the original 4.2BSD ftp, back in the middle 1990s. * https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/contrib/tnftp/ChangeLog#n1792 https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/contrib/tnftp/ChangeLog#n1... * https://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/usr.bin/ftp/main.c?rev=1.16 https://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/usr.bin/ftp/main.c?... * https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/log/src/usr.bin/ftp/main.c,v?sort=File#rev1.6 https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/log/src/usr.bin/ftp/main.c,v?sort...

klibertp 3mo ago
Nice! Thank you, that explains it. FreeBSD was my first *BSD and the only one I had long-term contact with, so I unconsciously use it as my "BSD standard". My bad on that :)