Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 16:53:08 +0300 From: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> To: Annihilator <annihilator.c@usa.net> Cc: jdp@freebsd.org, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: pptpclient-1.0.2 Message-ID: <20010623165308.F497@ringworld.oblivion.bg> In-Reply-To: <001001c0f9ca$cdfb91a0$0100a8c0@pilar>; from annihilator.c@usa.net on Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 10:51:09PM %2B0200 References: <001001c0f9ca$cdfb91a0$0100a8c0@pilar>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 10:51:09PM +0200, Annihilator wrote: > Many people prefer kernel-ppp to the userland program. There are two > things that you could do to make life easier for them: > 1) Create two separate ports, or > 2) Allow the user to choose at compile-time (if not run-time) which ppp > should be used. (Disclaimer: I have never actually run or used pptpclient.) Are you certain that pptpclient even works with pppd under FreeBSD? If it doesn't, and if it would require a lot of rewriting/patching to work, then it would be likely done better by the authors themselves, not as a FreeBSD port patch. Besides - are you really sure that 'many people prefer kernel-ppp'? Almost every FreeBSD user *I* know about is perfectly happy with the userland PPP implementation, which has many features, is constantly developed, and is *very* well integrated with the overall FreeBSD-way of doing things. Great job, Brian! G'luck, Peter -- What would this sentence be like if pi were 3? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010623165308.F497>