From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Apr 14 14:23:34 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA15181
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 14:23:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA15164
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 14:23:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id NAA19292; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 13:40:40 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199704142040.NAA19292@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: question about X.25 drivers
To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 13:40:40 -0700 (MST)
Cc: jbryant@tfs.net, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <16474.860906973@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Apr 12, 97 09:49:33 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Seriously, the biggest reason things "rot" in FreeBSD is that nobody
> is actively maintaining them.  If you want to take on X.25 both
> now and for the forseeable future, I see no problem with resurrecting
> it.

Actually, it's because there is no responsibility to enforce somone
changing an interface being responsible for changing all consumers of
that interface.

Again, the existing X.25 code did not change, FreeBSD did.  It is not
the code which is unusable by FreeBSD, it is FreeBSD which i incapable
of using the code.

Engaging in finger pointing at static code sucks...


					Regards,
					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.