Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 11:19:17 -0700 From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, Michael Smith <msmith@freebsd.org>, cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, cvs-usrbin@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/ftp complete.c fetch.c util.c Makefile cmds.c cmdtab.c domacro.c extern.h ftp.1 ftp.c ftp_var.h main.c pathnames.h ruserpass.c Message-ID: <199706251819.LAA17859@lestat.nas.nasa.gov>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 25 Jun 1997 10:07:00 -0400 (EDT) Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> wrote: > There's nothing evil about the current version of fetch. ...sure there is... it's an additional program that isn't necessary. I did the original cut of the http and auto-fetch stuff for NetBSD's ftp (then Luke made it much better :-) _specifically_ so I wouldn't have to add an extra program to my source tree to use the FreeBSD ports stuff. Adding programs that essentially duplicate functionality is, IMO, a really silly idea. > wollman@khavrinen(583)$ size /usr/bin/ftp > text data bss dec hex > 53248 8192 17880 79320 135d8 > wollman@khavrinen(584)$ size /usr/bin/fetch > text data bss dec hex > 32768 4096 2048 38912 9800 > > Let the record show that I have been unalterably opposed to additional > bloating of ftp(1). Your comparison is non-sensical. You really should be comparing: size of fetch + size of previous ftp to the new ftp. If the new ftp provides the same functionality of the old fetch, plus adds functionality to ftp, and allows you to delete the old fetch, you have _saved_ space. Jason R. Thorpe thorpej@nas.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center Home: 408.866.1912 NAS: M/S 258-6 Work: 415.604.0935 Moffett Field, CA 94035 Pager: 415.428.6939
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199706251819.LAA17859>