Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 00:17:30 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Sangwoo Shim <ssw@neo.redjade.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How about import mpd into base system? Message-ID: <20050302081729.GA76106@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20050302081019.GA25222@neo.redjade.org> References: <200503011650.j21GoI7o018125@peedub.jennejohn.org> <61202.1109698143@critter.freebsd.dk> <20050302081019.GA25222@neo.redjade.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--HcAYCG3uE/tztfnV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 Jen= nejohn w > > rites: > > > > > >Sangwoo Shim writes: > > >> Mpd is likely to be used by FreeBSD (and might DFBSD) exclusively. S= o, how > > >> about import mpd into the base tree? Is there any stopper to prevent= mpd from > > >> being included into the tree? > > >>=20 > > > > > >Why? /usr/sbin/ppp supports PPPoE just fine and is already in the base. > >=20 > > They should be merged. > >=20 > > mpd-netgraph has functionality missing in the ppp in the base system. >=20 > 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'. Kris --HcAYCG3uE/tztfnV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCJXaZWry0BWjoQKURAmFEAKCyn0Tm+MsGBWpyVxsd0DA03UXLQwCfSG7S VoFIvSW04cBUpkcQxn8J+rI= =ORMT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HcAYCG3uE/tztfnV--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050302081729.GA76106>