Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:46:11 -0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: How about import mpd into base system? Message-ID: <200503151746.11533.peter@wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <20050302081729.GA76106@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200503011650.j21GoI7o018125@peedub.jennejohn.org> <20050302081019.GA25222@neo.redjade.org> <20050302081729.GA76106@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 02 March 2005 12:17 am, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 05:10:19PM +0900, Sangwoo Shim wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 06:29:03PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > In message <200503011650.j21GoI7o018125@peedub.jennejohn.org>, > > > Gary Jennejohn w > > > > > > rites: > > > >Sangwoo Shim writes: > > > >> Mpd is likely to be used by FreeBSD (and might DFBSD) > > > >> exclusively. So, how about import mpd into the base tree? Is > > > >> there any stopper to prevent mpd from being included into the > > > >> tree? > > > > > > > >Why? /usr/sbin/ppp supports PPPoE just fine and is already in > > > > the base. > > > > > > They should be merged. > > > > > > mpd-netgraph has functionality missing in the ppp in the base > > > system. > > > > Exactly my opinion. I'm glad to know you think like that! > > Hmm, I'm curious whether there is any commiter planning mpd import. > > He said 'merged', as in 'combined into one program instead of having > two (three, including pppd) separate ppp implementations that do > almost the same thing'. By the way, I think the time has come for pppd/chat/if_ppp.c to leave the base and go back to being a 3rd party port. -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200503151746.11533.peter>