From owner-freebsd-current  Thu Aug 17 10:48:05 1995
Return-Path: current-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id KAA27779
          for current-outgoing; Thu, 17 Aug 1995 10:48:05 -0700
Received: from haywire.DIALix.COM (haywire.DIALix.COM [192.203.228.65])
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id KAA27763
          for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 17 Aug 1995 10:48:02 -0700
Received: (from news@localhost) by haywire.DIALix.COM (8.7.Beta.11/8.7.Beta.11/DIALix) id BAA18207 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Fri, 18 Aug 1995 01:47:57 +0800 (WST)
Received: from GATEWAY by haywire.DIALix.COM with netnews
	for freebsd-current@freebsd.org (problems to: usenet@haywire.dialix.com)
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Date: 18 Aug 1995 01:47:52 +0800
From: peter@haywire.dialix.com (Peter Wemm)
Message-ID: <40vvc8$hos$1@haywire.DIALix.COM>
Organization: DIALix Services, Perth, Australia.
References: <199508171335.GAA20286@time.cdrom.com>
Subject: Re: pppd
Sender: current-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) writes:

>I notice that pppd has now gone to revision 2.2 beta3, dated July 3rd
>1995.  Our own pppd is revision 2.1 dated the 9th of June 1994, over
>a year earlier..

>The biggest difference I can see is that 2.2 supports some sort of
>compression called "BSD-compress", whatever the heck that is..  There
>may of course also be some bug fixes..  You figure in a year they might
>have fixed a few things! :-)

>Any reason why we shouldn't fold this in from the NetBSD-current sources?

Yes.. The kernels are rapidly diverging in the tty area.

I've done a port of 2.2b3 to -current, and have updated it with all (I
think) of Bruce's changes.

ppp-2.2 is going to be announced *tomorrow*..

I dont know if it'll compile out of the box on FreeBSD, as I didn't
get the changes back to Paul Mackeras in time (had a trashed computer,
which was rather inconvenient to say the least..).  The earlier betas
would not compile on *any* freebsd, because we do not have the
#define __BIT_TYPES_DEFINED__ in <machine/types.h> via <sys/types.h>.

I know Paul has got some more recent stuff from Bruce, but I dont know
what or how much.

Bruce and I never really found out why there was in *increase* in
performance over the stuff currently in the kernel.

I got an OK from Garrett (with conditions) and Davidg to bring it in
earlier on, but had other things to worry about at the time...

-Peter

>					Jordan