From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Mar  7 08:19:22 1997
Return-Path: <owner-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA24230
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 7 Mar 1997 08:19:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA24202;
          Fri, 7 Mar 1997 08:19:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA11797; Fri, 7 Mar 1997 09:18:08 -0700 (MST)
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 09:18:08 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <199703071618.JAA11797@rocky.mt.sri.com>
From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Cc: ports@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Getting /usr/ports everywhere...
In-Reply-To: <4821.857735697@time.cdrom.com>
References: <4821.857735697@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Jordan K. Hubbard writes:
> I've been thinking about this for awhile, and I'm wondering whether or
> not 2.2 might be a good time to unleash /usr/ports as a distribution
> tarball as part of the release.

[ Adding everything but the 'dists' ]
> Comments?  Partially fermented fruit?

I like it.  However, I suspect if you do this you're going to get people
who complain that it doesn't work because the distribution got upgraded
from the time 'we' built the port and the time they get around to making
it.  But, it's better than nothing.

As an avid anti-bloatis I don't see this as 'bloat'. :) :)



Nate