Date: Wed, 04 Feb 1998 15:48:52 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> Cc: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>, Kirk McKusick <mckusick@McKusick.COM>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kirk's soft-update integration.. Message-ID: <240.886636132@gringo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 04 Feb 1998 10:31:39 PST." <34D8B40B.41C67EA6@whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I am mostly done with the patches. > and I have changed the new code to work with FreeBSD. > Whistle owns this work, however the patches will probably > make their way back into -current at some stage. > the new code itself will possibly have to be fetched by each user, > maybe kirk might set up a 'sign-to-get-it web page or something. Ummm. I still completely fail to see why OpenBSD was able to integrate all the hooks AND make the two "encumbered" (sorry to use that word ;) files available on their web site without any such hoop-jumping. I really do also get the feeling that the intervention of whistle in this matter has only vastly overcomplicated the situation for the average user. As amancio says, why can't we just ftp the files from someplace? I've asked Kirk about the method that OpenBSD used and he didn't seem to have any objections to what they're doing, so why will FreeBSD's support require a signature in blood before we can do the same thing? Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?240.886636132>