Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 22:13:58 -0600 (CST) From: obiwan!bob@uudell.us.dell.com (Bob Willcox) To: peter@bonkers.taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Cc: ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com, FreeBSD-hackers@wcarchive.cdrom.com, pechter@stars.sed.monmouth.army.mil Subject: Re: Patch for gnu/libexec/uucp Message-ID: <m0rjJJu-0002zzC@obiwan.uucp> In-Reply-To: <199502280046.SAA10916@bonkers.taronga.com> from "Peter da Silva" at Feb 27, 95 06:46:04 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter da Silva wrote:
>
> I vote for Taylor. The documentation is fine once you convert it to HTML and
> the configuration files are infinitely better, even for a basic system.
>
> I've run Taylor with both sets of files, by the way. L.sys/Systems still
> inhales no matter what's underneath it.
What's wrong with enabling both types of config files in the policy.h
file? Would this have some undesirable side-effect? I would rather
not have to modify the policy.h file myself and rebuild uucp. In
spite of taylor configuration being better than HDB (I'll take your
word for it), I have a set of HDB configuration files on my system
that have remained almost as-is for several years now, and I just
don't want to mess with converting them.
--
Bob Willcox ...!{rutgers|ames}!cs.utexas.edu!uudell!obiwan!bob
Austin, TX or try: @uudell.us.dell.com:obiwan!bob
512-258-4224 (home), 512-838-3914 (work)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m0rjJJu-0002zzC>