Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 00:25:58 +0300 From: Nimrod Mesika <nimrodm@bezeqint.net> To: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bringing LPRng into FreeBSD? - License Issues Message-ID: <20000712002558.A13291@localhost.bsd.net.il> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000711193915.70622A-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee>; from narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee on Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 07:43:59PM %2B0200 References: <200007111722.KAA11493@passer.osg.gov.bc.ca> <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000711193915.70622A-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 07:43:59PM +0200, Narvi wrote: > > 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. This scheme makes sense only for large components which have a well-defined interface. The MTA (i.e., sendmail, qmail, etc.) and LPR (lpr, lprng, cups) are good examples. Note that both these packages are not functional out-of-the-box without some configuration (usually). I don't think anyone is talking about applying this concept to df, dd and the others. -- Nimrod. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000712002558.A13291>