Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:04:47 -0700
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
To:        Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
Cc:        chat@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: strip FreeBSD a bit
Message-ID:  <3F601E8F.D67D79F5@mindspring.com>
References:  <3F50C956.70603@carebears.mine.nu> <20030830151544.G21642@znfgre.qbhto.arg> <3F5193E2.8060805@carebears.mine.nu> <20030831065010.GA23179@titan.klemm.apsfilter.org> <20030909221106.GA31532@dds.nl><xzp7k4g26lc.fsf@dwp.des.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote:
> Andreas Klemm <andreas@freebsd.org> writes:
> > I even dislike that UUCP had to go into ports ... Now you don't
> > have a standard tool in standard OS install like cu to connect
> > to serial ports what need for job in the networking area.
> =

> When UUCP was removed, tip(1) was hacked to understand cu(1)'s
> command-line syntax, so we still have cu(1).  I use it every day.

FYI, UUCP is also required by POSIX 1003.1-2003

http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/utilities/uucp.html

It's part of the [XSI] subset, which is required for compliance
with the Single UNIX Specification.  If FreeBSD wants certification
someday, it will have to bring back UUCP.

-- Terry



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3F601E8F.D67D79F5>