Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 14:05:40 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> Cc: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin Makefile src/usr.bin/doscmd AsyncIO.c README.booting_dos bios.c callback.c callback.h cmos.c com.h config.c cp Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0403241404370.63489-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20040324135211.T88409@qbhto.arg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Doug Barton wrote: > On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, David O'Brien wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 02:27:26PM -0800, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > des 2004/03/23 14:27:26 PST > > > > > > FreeBSD src repository > > > > > > Modified files: > > > usr.bin Makefile > > > Removed files: > > > usr.bin/doscmd AsyncIO.c AsyncIO.h Makefile Makefile.dos > > ... > > > Log: > > > Remove doscmd from the base system now that it lives in the ports tree. > > > > Did you *really* have consensus for this?? Several committers said it > > worked fine and some said they'd like it to remain in /usr/src. > > My recollection of the discussion was something like this: > > 1. Can we remove doscmd from the base and make it a port? > 2. NO! doscmd works and I use it! > 3. But we can easily make doscmd a port. > 4. Oh, well, ok, but maybe we should wait till 6.0? > 5. At this point, tjr assented to waiting, but others mentioned that if > we're going to do it, let's do it before 5.3 so that 5-stable looks more > like what we want it to look. > 6. I heard no objections to 5. > > My perspective on this might be skewed, since I vote for its removal to > ports, sooner rather than later, as well. > I think most people heard "tjr assented to waiting" as the end of the discussion. remember emails can get re-orderred.. > Doug > > -- > > This .signature sanitized for your protection > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0403241404370.63489-100000>