From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Oct  3 17:49:23 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA23812
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 17:49:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from freebie.lemis.com (gregl1.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.136.133])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23807
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 17:49:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from grog@localhost)
	by freebie.lemis.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id KAA05461;
	Sat, 4 Oct 1997 10:18:46 +0930 (CST)
Message-ID: <19971004101846.12337@lemis.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 10:18:46 +0930
From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
Cc: pechter@lakewood.com, dk+@ua.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: UUCP  (important clarification)
References: <199710031354.JAA04901@i4got.lakewood.com> <199710031430.AAA00858@word.smith.net.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.84e
In-Reply-To: <199710031430.AAA00858@word.smith.net.au>; from Mike Smith on Sat, Oct 04, 1997 at 12:00:44AM +0930
Organisation: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia
Phone: +61-8-8388-8250
Fax: +61-8-8388-8250
Mobile: +61-41-739-7062
WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog
Fight-Spam-Now: http://www.cauce.org
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Oct 04, 1997 at 12:00:44AM +0930, Mike Smith wrote:
>> I still think that FreeBSD should adopt the position of supporting HDB
>> V2 uucp configuration files in the system. (I have to rebuild uucp
>> after all the make worlds with my own patches to do so...)
>
> You are not helping yourself by not being clear.
>
> You do not mean "the Taylor configuration format should be abandoned in
> favour of the HDB and V2 formats", you mean "the UUCP suite should be
> built with support for the Taylor, HDB and V2 configuration formats".
>
> ie. HAVE_HDB_CONFIG and HAVE_V2_CONFIG should be set to 1 in /usr/src/
> gnu/libexec/uucp/common_source/policy.h.
>
> This wouldn't cost anything functionality-wise, and would make Bill
> happy.  Can we achieve enough consensus on this to make it into 2.2.5?

It's a good thing that you said this.  I misunderstood Bill, and I'm
sure a lot of other people do.  I agree with this suggestion, and not
what I understood Bill to have said.

I can't really see this getting changed for 2.2.5, though.

Greg