From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 22 11:36:53 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 797EF106566B; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:36:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 370728FC15; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:36:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.codelab.cz [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24AE219E023; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:36:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (r5bb235.net.upc.cz [86.49.61.235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F22C519E027; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:36:48 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4AB8B6D0.2000809@quip.cz> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:36:48 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: cz, cs, en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sergey Vinogradov References: <20090921112657.GW95398@hoeg.nl> <20090922135435.36a3d40e@lazybytes.org> In-Reply-To: <20090922135435.36a3d40e@lazybytes.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Ed Schouten , current@FreeBSD.org, arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: tmux(1) in base X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:36:53 -0000 Sergey Vinogradov wrote: > В Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:26:57 +0200 > Ed Schouten пишет: [...] > I don't think tmux(1) should be included in the base system. As it was > mentioned, it will be hard to update it, many people will still install > screen(1) because they still like it more, or just got used to it, the > system will become a little more bloated, and nobody likes when that > happens :) [...] > The things in the base system I always wondered about are sendmail > and bind9. These are pretty heavy, and definitely are not used in every > single installation. Maybe someday I'll see sendmail and bind9 in ports > instead of base system. And yes, I know about WITHOUT_BIND= and > WITHOUT_SENDMAIL= :) I can second this. I am using Sendmail only on one machine (replaced with Postfix on the others) and the same with BIND. It should be better to not have them in base, but have them as ports with special care of FreeBSD team. It will give us better possibility of updates and fixes for users who are using them. And if SW like this will be available for install by sysinstall in some extra category as 'always on the first / minimal media' (or installed by default?), then anybody can install it if needed. Miroslav Lachman