From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 4 14:28:36 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A2F437B401 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2003 14:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.157.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB69C43F93 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2003 14:28:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (Ugrondar@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h54LSYuD044784; Wed, 4 Jun 2003 22:28:34 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: (from Ugrondar@localhost)h54LSY30044783; Wed, 4 Jun 2003 22:28:34 +0100 (BST) X-Authentication-Warning: storm.FreeBSD.org.uk: Ugrondar set sender to mark@grondar.org using -f Received: from grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])h54LQxHh008013; Wed, 4 Jun 2003 22:26:59 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) From: Mark Murray Message-Id: <200306042126.h54LQxHh008013@grimreaper.grondar.org> To: Marcel Moolenaar In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 04 Jun 2003 14:10:52 PDT." <20030604211052.GA2050@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 22:26:59 +0100 Sender: mark@grondar.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,FROM_NO_LOWER,IN_REP_TO, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES version=2.55 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: A proposed drastic cleanup of the telnet build. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 21:28:36 -0000 Marcel Moolenaar writes: > On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 09:42:50PM +0100, Mark Murray wrote: > > > > I propose to 'cvs rm' the 'base' telnet, and build base telnet by > > not defining the appropriate macros. > > [snip] > > > The downside is that base telnet will depend on src/crypto/telnet, > > so folks in dodgy countries which don't allow them to have crypto > > source will not be able to do telnet development, and they will > > not get a "fresh" telnet[d] after a make world. > > I think it's a good idea. Do you know how many (which?) dodgy countries > there are on this particular rock we call the earth? I mean, WRT to this > particular issue of course :-) The only one that I can think of that makes public domain crypto illegal is Myanmar/Burma, and this is because owning a computer is illegal. China makes certain crypto _use_ illegal. This is not a problem here. France just got rid of a law (or published a clarification) that makes this not a problem. M -- Mark Murray iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH