From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Sep 10 3:13:21 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from relay.ucb.crimea.ua (relay.ucb.crimea.ua [212.110.138.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06EBE14E7E for ; Fri, 10 Sep 1999 03:12:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ru@ucb.crimea.ua) Received: (from ru@localhost) by relay.ucb.crimea.ua (8.9.3/8.9.3/UCB) id NAA15877; Fri, 10 Sep 1999 13:10:26 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from ru) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 13:10:26 +0300 From: Ruslan Ermilov To: Boris Popov Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NetWare client in -current Message-ID: <19990910131026.B10140@relay.ucb.crimea.ua> Mail-Followup-To: Boris Popov , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG References: <19990910122431.B99718@relay.ucb.crimea.ua> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.3i In-Reply-To: ; from Boris Popov on Fri, Sep 10, 1999 at 04:58:52PM +0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.2-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Sep 10, 1999 at 04:58:52PM +0700, Boris Popov wrote: > On Fri, 10 Sep 1999, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > > Is there any reason to not have it as a port? > > > > > IMHO, only the basic IPX/SPX functionality should be included into the > > source tree. Anything else could be available as ports/net/nw-utils. > > An IPX/SPX stack is already in the tree and past year made it more > or less functional. > Read: I fully agree with Daniel. Forgive me my ignorance, but I'd like a quick response: what about multiple ethernet frames for IPX? Is it supported in -current? In -stable? Thanks, -- Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA of the ru@ucb.crimea.ua United Commercial Bank, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.247.647 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message