Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 09:57:04 +1000 From: "Andrew Reilly" <areilly@bigpond.net.au> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Daniel O'Connor <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Moving UUCP to ports Message-ID: <20010919095704.A14016@gurney.reilly.home> In-Reply-To: <3BA7A37E.93DA21B8@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 12:41:50PM -0700 References: <XFMail.20010918154737.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <3BA6EB64.A4F9720C@mindspring.com> <20010917235356.A41864@xor.obsecurity.org> <3BA7A37E.93DA21B8@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 12:41:50PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: > Except that most of the people in the world don't have an FTP > server, and the ISP links that they do have prevent them from > running a server at all -- and it is *precisely* these people > who need UUCP. Is there no possibility that the putative ports-based distribution could live on FreeBSD's FTP server without being part of the main tree? There's sourceforge too, unless that has strings attached that I haven't bothered to investigate. > To your point about it "not having been maintained": I prefer > to think of it as an "if it isn't broke, don't fix it". Isn't the issue that brokenness _has_ been identified? > Can we move on to talking about making sendmail and perl into > ports instead? Yes please. I realize that perl has a lot of support, and that's not really ever going to happen. Sendmail I can already turn off, so that doesn't worry me overly either. Ports dependancy issues and interactions with the main tree are always fun discussion topics, though... :-) -- Andrew 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?20010919095704.A14016>