Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 15:09:16 -0600 From: Ted Spradley <tsprad@set.spradley.tmi.net> To: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@futuresouth.com> Cc: Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended software support <software@kew.com>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: after the release ... Message-ID: <E0yG92S-0001UU-00@set.spradley.tmi.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 20 Mar 1998 12:31:53 CST." <Pine.BSF.3.96.980320123011.20071f-100000@shell.futuresouth.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[make and cvs rant deleted] > I'm going to resist the temptation to agree violently with certain > sentiments here... :-) [...] > Part of the point is so people wouldn't HAVE to have the source to do that > patch. If they have the source, and feel comfortable about doing the make > world, then they're doing it anyway. I agree the sources are big and take a lot of file space, but I'm looking at an ad for a 5.2G byte disk drive for $199. Not free, but used 1G drives might be. I have trouble understanding the comfort part here. How does one feel more comfortable applying a big binary patch? The point of free (as in freedom) software is that you get the sources. With a binary patch you get the assurances of a faceless corporation that you will be allowed to spend hours listening to music on the telephone if you have difficulty with the binary patch. Is that more comfortable than learning to type "make world"? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E0yG92S-0001UU-00>