Subject: Re: openbgpd 3.7
To: Steven M. Bellovin <email@example.com>
From: Eric Haszlakiewicz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/23/2006 10:48:48
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 09:40:11PM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> In message <20060123022359.GA2753@panix.com>, Thor Lancelot Simon writes:
> >On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 07:36:46PM -0600, David Young wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 08:22:48PM +0100, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hm... I would have thought that openbgpd is a candidate for pkgsrc, not
> >> > for base.
> >> It would be a shame to squander openbgpd's *.mk-based build and
> >> cross-buildability by putting it into pkgsrc instead of into base.
> >I tend to agree. With syspkg so close to working, I think this is
> >precisely the sort of thing that should go into /usr/src though quite
> >possibly not into the traditional base.tgz tar file.
> Should we have extras.tgz for such things? And perhaps move some other
> very lightly used programs to it?
Why put it in one of the main tarballs at all? Just have a openbgpd.tgz
package that happens to be includes in the standard build, and maybe throw
it, and any other not-included-in-base/etc/comp/text.tgz packages, in a