Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:21:22 -0700 From: Doug Barton <DougB@gorean.org> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@picnic.mat.net> Cc: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, papowell@astart.com Subject: Re: was: Bringing LPRng into FreeBSD? Message-ID: <39582BC2.CF2FF631@gorean.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006262139520.318-100000@picnic.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chuck Robey wrote:
> There have been internally generated updates (take a look at cvs log). I
> have to admit there haven't been too many, but I personally really hate
> adding more GPL software, when the existing software WILL do the job for
> most users, and ports can serve equally well for folks who need more
> capability. If the only criteria was which was better, then ports
> wouldn't really exist. If I wanted GPL stuff, I would go get Linux.
> If I want lprng, I need only install the port. It's really easy adding a
> port, but far harder taking lprng back out and adding in lpr back again,
> for those folks who are using FreeBSD as a commercial development
> platform.
>
> I just don't like gratuitously adding in extra GPL when there's no
> absolutely required reason for it.
This says it all for me. I haven't seen a compelling argument that our
current lpd is flawed, just limited. That's not enough to justify bring
in GNU software, even under the artistic license. Anyone who needs
lprng's functionality can install the port, or apsfilter, or whatever
else will work for them.
I strongly oppose the inclusion of lprng in the base.
Speaking only for myself,
Doug
--
"Live free or die"
- State motto of my ancestral homeland, New Hampshire
Do YOU Yahoo!?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?39582BC2.CF2FF631>