From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Sep 10 10:29:20 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [63.67.141.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DFFE14E2B for ; Fri, 10 Sep 1999 10:29:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from winter@jurai.net) Received: from localhost (winter@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA27151; Fri, 10 Sep 1999 13:28:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 13:28:41 -0400 (EDT) From: "Matthew N. Dodd" To: "Daniel O'Connor" Cc: "Daniel O'Connor" , Boris Popov , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NetWare client in -current In-Reply-To: <37D93D65.627AD43@dons.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, 11 Sep 1999, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > "Matthew N. Dodd" wrote: > > > The only possible candidate for contrib'ifying I could see would be > > > mount_nwfs because building it without the kernel source could be a > > > problem, but the rest of it could be a port I think :) > > Thats like suggesting we make the 'ipfw' command a port and leave the > > kernel bits in the tree. Since all this stuff depends on being in sync, > > the only reasonable way to do this is to put it in the tree. > > Why? What kernel code does this need? The ncpfs kernel code for one. We're talking about less than 500k of code here. You want to take the anti-bloatist stance you'll have to do better than that. Try libreadline for starters. :) -- | Matthew N. Dodd | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD | | winter@jurai.net | 2 x '84 Volvo 245DL | ix86,sparc,pmax | | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | This Space For Rent | ISO8802.5 4ever | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message