From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Jul 11 20:19:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from picnic.mat.net (picnic.mat.net [206.246.122.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D32B37BB49; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 20:19:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from chuckr@picnic.mat.net) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by picnic.mat.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA85497; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 23:19:00 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from chuckr@picnic.mat.net) Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 23:18:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: "Jeroen C. van Gelderen" Cc: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, Sheldon Hearn , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bringing LPRng into FreeBSD? - License Issues In-Reply-To: <396BCC40.B144C513@vangelderen.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Jeroen C. van Gelderen wrote: > > Then how about we rip LPR from the base system and let people install the > > printing system they need from ports? > > Yay! I think this is the correct approach for most software > that isn't universally needed and for which 2 or more > competing versions exist. I disagree very strongly. This goes directly in the face of friendliness. Assume that *some* folks (and I say that tongue-in-cheek) are actually not gurus when they install FreeBSD ... they want (and very rightly expect) that a good assortment of default utilities exist so that they can take advantage of the capabilities of a good OS. I'm not saying we bundle everything, but I *am* saying that there are a minimum of utils that should NOT be divorced. Print is very definitely one of these. > PS. I think lpr ought not be in the base system. If however we > include one it should be lprNG. Our lpr is crap. That's going *way* too far. Our lpr is far from crap, and is maintained. Seeing as the license thing is taken care of, I am no longer against LPRng, but I *am* against inflammatory false statements (seeming to say "everything but my personal choice is garbage"), and I am *very* much against making FreeBSD more user-unfriendly out of the box. If I see LPRng getting brought in on wings of statements like that, I will oppose it. If I see LPRng (now that the license issue is settled) brought in for solid, proveable reasons, I'll be happy it happened. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include C & Java programming, FreeBSD, chuckr@picnic.mat.net | electronics, communications, and signal processing. New Year's Resolution: I will not sphroxify gullible people into looking up fictitious words in the dictionary. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message