Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:36:20 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG, kris@obsecurity.org, lyndon@orthanc.ab.ca, Joe Abley <jabley@automagic.org> Subject: Re: Moving UUCP to ports Message-ID: <3BA6EB64.A4F9720C@mindspring.com> References: <XFMail.20010918154737.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > Leave it alone, unless you can identify a vendor who is > > maintaining it, and we can agree to select that vendor as > > the "official" vendor of UUCP, from this day forward. > > > > Next people will be suggesting that we make /bin/ls a port... > > Except that 100% of users use ls. > About 0%* use UUCP. > > * Straw poll from every person I've ever talked to about FreeBSD. I use UUCP. Unlike fetchmail, delivery of mail via UUCP over TCP does not destroy envelope information, yet permits me to run a server in dialup mode. Another person just recently posted in favor of UUCP. In any case, you have ignored the first argument: if FreeBSD does not maintain UUCP for FreeBSD, who will maintain UUCP for FreeBSD? -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3BA6EB64.A4F9720C>