From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Jul 11 13: 4:50 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from point.osg.gov.bc.ca (point.osg.gov.bc.ca [142.32.102.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3CBF37BC10; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 13:04:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by point.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.8) id NAA18823; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 13:04:20 -0700 Received: from passer.osg.gov.bc.ca(142.32.110.29) via SMTP by point.osg.gov.bc.ca, id smtpda18821; Tue Jul 11 13:04:05 2000 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by passer.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.9.3/8.9.1) id NAA13351; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 13:04:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200007112004.NAA13351@passer.osg.gov.bc.ca> Received: from localhost.osg.gov.bc.ca(127.0.0.1), claiming to be "passer.osg.gov.bc.ca" via SMTP by localhost.osg.gov.bc.ca, id smtpdS13342; Tue Jul 11 13:03:51 2000 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 Reply-To: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group X-OS: FreeBSD 4.0-STABLE X-Sender: cy To: Narvi Cc: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group , obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, Sheldon Hearn , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bringing LPRng into FreeBSD? - License Issues In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:43:59 +0200." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 13:03:51 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message , Nar vi writes: > > On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group wrote: > > > In message <20000711092233.F26861@dragon.nuxi.com>, "David O'Brien" > > writes: > > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 03:51:58PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > > > 3) Many folks who need LPRng will have to install it from the ports to > > > > get all of its functionality. > > > > > > Then how about we rip LPR from the base system and let people install the > > > printing system they need from ports? > > > > This would be a huge step in the right direction. We should do the > > same with Sendmail, BIND, nvi, and every other component of the O/S. > > In short everything should be installed (or for those of us who > > installworld, registered) as packages, like Solaris or MVS (IBM > > mainframe O/S) do. Let the user decide what to install or not install. > > > > And unless there existed convinient to use collections of those (let's > call that bin dist), lot's of people would really hate that. I consider > the present system of being able to get a pretty unified standard base > system a big plus. That also means being able to depend on the presence of > such when writing programs/scripts and not wrorrying too much about that > there might be a system on which somebody forgot to install df, dd or > something else trivial. Meta packages like, bin, would include everything necessary and could be structured in such a way were the user would be required to choose between for example nvi or vim (IMO better than nvi). In the end you would have a df, dd, and vi, the one of your choosing. Choosing no vi for example would not be an option. (Sorry but vi is the example that comes to mind here). This would apply equally to lpr/LPRng, MTA's, named, or anything else in the system. Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437 Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766 Team Leader, Sun/DEC Team Internet: Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA Province of BC To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message