On  1 Oct, Erik E. Fair wrote:
> ANDF is the answer to a question no one here is asking:  how do I support
> multiple platforms without handing out my precious, proprietary source code
> to people whose wierd computers I don't have?

I had sort of assumed that this was why people wanted a binary-only
distribution format.  Given my own success with the FreeBSD ports
system, I thought that the ease of use argument (below) was no-longer a
starter.  You would probably still have to manage a ports
hierarchy for each NetBSD port, but that's still only a few megs/port,
instead of gazillions.

> The goal is to have popular software packages already compiled and
> ready-to-install for each of the platforms that NetBSD supports.  This is a
> conveninence for busy people, and makes NetBSD that much more attractive to
> potential users - there's less work to do to set up a system for a wider array
> of uses.

OK, your choice, after all.

If binary installation is somehow easier than source installation, I
still think that NetBSD (with different processors, but identical
system architecture) would be an ideal place to try something like ANDF
out.

-- 
Andrew

"The steady state of disks is full."
				-- Ken Thompson