From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 5 04:43:48 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 B1F9737B401; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 04:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.157.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADABD43FBF; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 04:43:47 -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 h55BhkuD074511; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 12:43:46 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: (from Ugrondar@localhost)h55BhkT3074510; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 12:43:46 +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])h55BeFHh013268; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 12:40:15 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) From: Mark Murray Message-Id: <200306051140.h55BeFHh013268@grimreaper.grondar.org> To: Ruslan Ermilov In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 05 Jun 2003 13:46:20 +0300." <20030605104620.GA47983@sunbay.com> Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 12:40:15 +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: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 11:43:49 -0000 Ruslan Ermilov writes: > > 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. > > > > Comments? I'm keen to go on this. > > > I'm not so sure about this. If it would be possible to extract > the crypto bits of the telnet sources to separate source files, > and leave them under src/crypto/, I think that would be the best, > but if it's too hard, well, the price could be paid. The point is that src/crypto is the part of the tree that will be trimmed if there is a ban on crypto source. Part of the same point is to avoid having duplicate sources, resulting in folks editing only one and having code divergence between the two. > Still, even if we decide to leave both copies of sources, > reducing the number of (lib)telnet(d) makefiles to one set > is the way to go. Thats the idea! M -- Mark Murray iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH