Firstly, this compressed vnd thing is cool - thanks!

>On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, matthew green wrote:
>> i don't want "vnconfig" to ever be removed.  i don't see any point.

>The point is consistence between vnd(4), vndconfig(8) and vndcompress(1, 
>not yet committed).

No.  The consistency argument supports _adding_ a link as vndconfig.
I haven't noted anyone object to that.

However nothing says that vnconfig must go.  All the hords of users who have
used "vnconfig" over recent years (decades?) will not thankyou for hosing 
them.

>But as this is aparently such a big problem, i'll put that down on the 
>list now... seems NetBSD isn't about doing things the right way any more.

Says who?  I'd suggest not hosing users _is_ the right thing to do.

Simply add vndconfig as a link if it makes you happy - why hose the CVS history

--sjg