From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 26 10:26:35 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACA6116A4DA; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 10:26:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from massimo@cedoc.mo.it) Received: from aa001msr.fastwebnet.it (aa001msr.fastwebnet.it [85.18.95.64]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0C00445E4; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 10:26:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from massimo@cedoc.mo.it) Received: from intanto.datacode.it (37.254.91.189) by aa001msr.fastwebnet.it (7.2.070.1) id 44AD3F5B016DC5B6; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 12:26:30 +0200 Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 12:26:34 +0200 From: Massimo Lusetti To: Robert Watson Message-Id: <20060826122634.f85f8671.massimo@cedoc.mo.it> In-Reply-To: <20060826055402.W43127@fledge.watson.org> References: <44E9582C.2010400@rsu.ru> <44ECBB7D.4090905@FreeBSD.org> <20060823205523.GB27961@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <20060825220033.GC16768@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20060826055402.W43127@fledge.watson.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.6 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: peterjeremy@optushome.com.au, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, bushman@rsu.ru Subject: Re: [HEADS UP]: OpenLDAP+nss_ldap+nss_modules separated patch and more (SoC) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 10:26:35 -0000 On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 06:00:02 +0100 (BST) Robert Watson wrote: > One of the strongest historical arguments for using *BSD as the base for [..] > abandoning integrated revision control and building of the current system. FWIW I would like to second this comment, and would extend that saying that i feel lack of a DHCP server in the base. > Sure, we can make the build-time construction of the system modular in a > cleaner and more comprehensive way, and provide better binary delivery > mechanisms that offer more of the build-time flexibility we already have to > the end-user. But an argument to dismember the current system is a > non-starter. If I wanted to try to build a complete and integrated system > from scratch, without any guarantees that the versions of the components had > been tested together, without an integrated build system, etc, I could always > use one of a thousand Linux distributions. A self-standing buildworld out of > a single CVS checkout is one of our greatest strengths. That's the first main reason why i moved to FreeBSD, six years ago. Holy words! Regards, Massimo