From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Jan  5 20:15:48 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id UAA23018
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 5 Jan 1996 20:15:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from precipice.shockwave.com (precipice.shockwave.com [171.69.108.33])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA23013
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 5 Jan 1996 20:15:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from pst@localhost) by precipice.shockwave.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) id UAA06126 for current@freebsd.org; Fri, 5 Jan 1996 20:15:10 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 20:15:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Paul Traina <pst@Shockwave.COM>
Message-Id: <199601060415.UAA06126@precipice.shockwave.com>
To: current@freebsd.org
Subject: s/rpc\.\(.*\)/\1/g?
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

I'd have no objection to renaming the new utilities, if, and only if,
we do it consistently and rename all the rpc utilities.  This seems reasonable
given that nfsd and mountd don't have rpc. in front of them.

What are people's feelings?  Rename or don't?