Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 12:06:51 -0700 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC: Fate of /usr/share/doc/smm/10.named Message-ID: <20020701190651.777033916@overcee.wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <3D209F09.1525FC90@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Barton wrote: > Robert Watson wrote: > > > > On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > > > > On 2002-06-30 23:44 +0000, Doug Barton wrote: > > > > To fix the build, I removed 10.named from the smm/Makefile temporarily. > > > > I'd like to permanently remove it, since IMO it's no longer pertinent. > > > > Opinions? > > > > > > There are other documents in /usr/share/doc/smm that are kept there only > > > for their historical value, since they no longer describe what is done > > > today. One example, that I could find by looking at the ascii output I > > > keep in my /usr/share/doc, is 01.setup/paper.ascii.gz. Is it really > > > necessary to remove 10.named? > > > > I think keeping things for historical reasons is a useful thing to do, but > > that installing them in the default install is definitely not a useful > > thing to do since it will only lead to confusion. > > I agree with this reasoning, and also with keeping them around > "somewhere." The BOG is a particularly good candidate for pruning since > it's still available from the vendor. FWIW; This doesn't help you if you are on an isolated lan and trying to use named on your island network instead of /etc/hosts. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 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?20020701190651.777033916>