Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:55:48 +0100 From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) 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 AsyncIO.h Makefile Makefile.dos PROBLEMS ParseBuffer.c README README.booting_dos bios.c callback.c callback.h cmos.c com.h config.c cp Message-ID: <xzp3c7xcnl7.fsf@dwp.des.no> In-Reply-To: <20040324135211.T88409@qbhto.arg> (Doug Barton's message of "Wed, 24 Mar 2004 13:54:58 -0800 (PST)") References: <200403232227.i2NMRQn5042762@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040324164155.GA4737@dragon.nuxi.com> <20040324135211.T88409@qbhto.arg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> writes: > 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. I saw 1, 2, 3 as above and then 4. Yeah right, as if *you're* going to bother. 5. Actually, I already have patches. 6. Oh, OK then. The whole discussion is pretty pointless though, since doscmd has lain more or less fallow for years and there are several equivalent but far better maintained tools in ports (pcemu, bochs...) DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzp3c7xcnl7.fsf>