From owner-freebsd-current Tue Jan 26 22:01:50 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA01849 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 22:01:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.95.76.54]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA01843; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 22:01:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA09222; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 22:03:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk) From: Steve Kargl Message-Id: <199901270603.WAA09222@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: removing f2c from base distribution In-Reply-To: <199901270151.RAA64117@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> from Satoshi Asami at "Jan 26, 1999 5:51:25 pm" To: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi Asami) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 22:03:04 -0800 (PST) Cc: obrien@NUXI.com, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Satoshi Asami wrote: > * Well, actually I did f2c as a port, and it does indeed fit > * inside the ports paradigm. Please, see my original email in > * the thread. > > Yes, I know that. I was just wondering why people would want it > otherwise. > My original email provided an opportunity to revisit the sendmail versus postfix controversy. That is, some software seems to fall short of support for inclusion in the base distribution but it may be too important for ports. Maybe the package system that I seen discussed will obviate the controversy. -- Steve finger kargl@troutmask.apl.washington.edu http://troutmask.apl.washington.edu/~clesceri/kargl.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message