From owner-freebsd-ports  Tue May 23 22:21:59 1995
Return-Path: ports-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id WAA29262
          for ports-outgoing; Tue, 23 May 1995 22:21:59 -0700
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA29255
          ; Tue, 23 May 1995 22:21:57 -0700
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.11/8.6.9) id WAA03738; Tue, 23 May 1995 22:21:30 -0700
Date: Tue, 23 May 1995 22:21:30 -0700
Message-Id: <199505240521.WAA03738@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de
CC: mark@grondar.za, jkh@freefall.cdrom.com, wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de,
        ports@FreeBSD.org
In-reply-to: <199505231531.RAA11998@caramba.cs.tu-berlin.de> (message from Wolfram Schneider on Tue, 23 May 1995 17:31:57 +0200)
Subject: Re: top(1)
From: asami@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=)
Sender: ports-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * >I suspect that this person is actually asking "Why is top not part of the
 * >standard distribution?".
 * 
 * Exactly.

For one thing, it is fairly frequently upgraded and works with only
minor changes for FreeBSD.  It is much easier to maintain a port of a
piece of software in that case than having it in our main source tree.

But it really doesn't matter, building a port is about as easy as life
can get, and you can even install a package.  These stuff are all
going to be on the CDROM anyway, so there isn't much reason to further
bloat our main source tree.

Satoshi