From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 1 08:58:56 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF11E106566C; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 08:58:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FD218FC13; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 08:58:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2621246B1A; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 04:58:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:58:55 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: "Blapp, Martin" In-Reply-To: <509A7CA1EA3EA046B1A5BA2FCFDB3C8EECC53324B6@TSS-EXCH01.t-systems.ch> Message-ID: References: <0E6D4FB2-A485-40ED-A856-ACC311A90EFE@msys.ch> <20090630.141340.289711551.imp@bsdimp.com> <7B9C309F-63E3-4CB8-9871-DE2DEE010096@msys.ch> <20090630.164009.2130804684.imp@bsdimp.com>, <1246413402.70460.23.camel@bauer.cse.buffalo.edu> <509A7CA1EA3EA046B1A5BA2FCFDB3C8EECC53324B6@TSS-EXCH01.t-systems.ch> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Ken Smith , "svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org" , "marc@msys.ch" , "src-committers@FreeBSD.org" , "svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org" , "mbr@FreeBSD.org" , "M. Warner Losh" Subject: Re: AW: svn commit: r195200 - in head/usr.sbin: . wake X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 08:58:57 -0000 On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, Blapp, Martin wrote: > I really was not my or Marcs intention to skip any discussions. Rwatson told > us that if we like to see it in 8.0, we need to approve it by RE and commit > it before the 1. of july, and that's what I've done. Sorry if I've upset > anyone. > > Personally I think the tool is quite handy, better than net/wol (which > doesn't seem to work with different interfaces), wake doesn't need any > strange libaries as dependencies and it just a very short one (4k) > > If the concensus is to back it out, I'll back it out. FWIW, I think having a wake-on-lan tool in the base system is pretty valuable -- it's compact, useful, etc. Making sure we get the right tool, that it has the right name, right license, no odd script dependencies, etc, are all reasonable concerns, and could have been handled better by addressing them on the lists before, rather than after, the commit (Marc's tool meets some but not all of these requirements on face value). That said, I am caught a bit by surprise at the level of my response, and was not aware of the NetBSD-side discussion... Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge