On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, Olaf Seibert wrote:

> On Sun 29 Sep 2002 at 10:29:35 -0500, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> > The latest, well-maintained version is "netatalk". "netatalk-asun" is
> > an older cut of the same codebase, and "netatalk-umich" is really old.

I'm not sure if I'm ready to vote for g/c'ing them, but I think it's fine
to mark them as compatability-only (i.e. you have a particular reason to
keep using the old stuff).

> Aha, that was not really clear to me from the package descriptions.
> I installed the "plain" netatalk package and so far it appears to work.
> I think previously the netatalks got confused because I have multiple
> interfaces. Also this time I needed to tell it to use only ne0 and then
> it was ok.
>
> > Please report if "netatalk" works for you. If so, I think we should
> > garbage collect the other two.
>
> Maybe keep netatalk-asun a bit more; it builds a whole lot quicker than
> netatalk...

Hmmm... Can you tell where it slows down? The "netatalk" package is a
later descendant in the same code line as the -asun packages.

Take care,

Bill