From owner-freebsd-current Wed Oct 3 13:12:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA4637B401 for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 13:12:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nomad.yogotech.com (nomad.yogotech.com [206.127.123.131]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA18022; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 14:12:26 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate@nomad.yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by nomad.yogotech.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00711; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 14:12:25 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate) From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15291.28969.437046.367082@nomad.yogotech.com> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 14:12:25 -0600 To: Lyndon Nerenberg Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: uucp user shell and home directory In-Reply-To: <200110031936.f93JaQ8f031433@atg.aciworldwide.com> References: <200110031936.f93JaQ8f031433@atg.aciworldwide.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.95 under 21.1 (patch 12) "Channel Islands" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > All these "solutions" assume that everyone is wired up with IP > connectivity. The original questions was "who uses UUCP?" Correct. > One answer is: "those without IP connectivity." Do you mean 'full-time IP connectivity', because if you can setup a UUCP connection, you can just as easily setup a PPP connection over the same medium, giving you IP connectivity. > Part of the problem > here I suspect is that the people who develop and maintain FreeBSD > live a life where a T-3 into your livingroom is just something you > take for granted. Not so. > UUCP has many valid uses. Even today. If you don't understand the > software, that's fine with me. Just don't use your ignorance as > an excuse to dike the software out. Or more precisely, admit > you want to rip the code out because you don't understand what > it is, rather than making up specious excuses for it's removal. Cheap shot. Some of us who favor diking out UUCP were heavily involved with the Internet back when it was essntially Usenet over UUCP. :) I favor diking it out because there are in almost all cases (but not necessarily *ALL* cases) a better solution that exists. Because of this, I don't believe that UUCP is a mainstream solution, and therefore doesn't belong in the mainstream release. It *is* still available as an add-on port, so those who need it can still get it, but it doesn't clutter up the regular distributions. Finally, the security issues make it a non-starter to keep in the default distribution. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message