From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Jun 13 10:25:16 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from thuvia.demon.co.uk (thuvia.demon.co.uk [193.237.34.248]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25D3937B400 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 10:25:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dotar.thuvia.org (dotar.thuvia.org [10.0.0.4]) by phaidor.thuvia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5DHP3N37499; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 18:25:04 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@thuvia.demon.co.uk) Received: (from mark@localhost) by dotar.thuvia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g5DHP3f13160; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 18:25:03 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 18:25:03 +0100 (BST) From: Mark Valentine Message-Id: <200206131725.g5DHP3f13160@dotar.thuvia.org> In-Reply-To: Garrett Wollman's message of Jun 13, 5:05pm X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.6 beta(5) 10/07/98) To: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman), cyrille.lefevre@laposte.net Subject: Re: The Source Code Control System Cc: arch@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) > Date: Thu 13 Jun, 2002 > Subject: Re: The Source Code Control System > >maybe because they are required by SUSV3 : > > > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/utilities/ > > Irrelevant. > > The Standard does not care how the utilities are packaged, only that > someone installing the operating system gets them if she asks. I agree that this doesn't need to be a core part of FreeBSD. On the other hand I feel it warrants being better integrated than a port, for both historical and standards reasons. That's to say, if it's installed, I'd like it to use the BSD makefiles and live in /usr/bin. Also, I believe that certain standards-related components like this warrant being supported by the project (albeit as contrib material), and we do have a committer behind this one. Currently, doing this requires that it go in the base system, but once we've cracked the packaging of the base system I'd see it as a sub-package of an optional XSI Extensions package, which probably wouldn't even be in the default "BSD" package bundle. If we could live with it being in the base system for now, but not have people rely on it being there by default in future, importing it into contrib wouldn't be too painful, would it? Cheers, Mark. -- Mark Valentine, Thuvia Labs "Tigers will do ANYTHING for a tuna fish sandwich." Mark Valentine uses "We're kind of stupid that way." *munch* *munch* and endorses FreeBSD -- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message