Subject: Re: final testing: taylor-uucp package
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com>
From: Eric Schnoebelen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/04/2002 16:46:49
Hubert Feyrer writes:
- On Tue, 1 Jan 2002, Eric Schnoebelen wrote:
- > One thing that's missing: uucpd.
- > Does it make sense to leave that in the base NetBSD
- > system when there's not a supporting UUCP implementation? I'd
- > believe it should either be another package, or rolled in as
- > part of this one.
- It needs to be made into it's own package too.
- I only saw it's not part of taylor-uucp when one of the recent security
- patches was committed to the NetBSD repository... todo
- > So, I'd recommend the package name be taylor-uucp, and
- > the directory be one of comms/taylor-uucp or net/taylor-uucp (or
- > perhaps sysutils/taylor-uucp?)
- Yup, net/taylor-uucp and net/uucpd (eventually)
- > I've installed it on my UUCP host, and the user level
- > commands interoperate with the system daemon. I haven't tried
- > replacing the system provided uucico with the one from pkgsrc
- > (yet), but I don't expect problems.
- The interaction is always a problem... no idea on how to deal with that
Well, it interacts well with the NetBSD 1.4 uucp,
largely because it _is_ the NetBSD uucp. Otherwise, the check
as done for Solaris seem like the right idea.
I have noticed that it is dropping core with some of my
TCP sessions. The same is true of the `stock' uucico as well,
so it's not a new problem.
As I recall, the problem was discussed on the taylor-ucup
mailing earlier this year, and a patch might have been provided.
The list archives are at http://lists.cirr.com/taylor-uucp.
I'm going to verify the defect, and then probably submit
a PR with the fix...
Eric Schnoebelen email@example.com http://www.cirr.com
There is no limit to the amount of good that people can accomplish,
if they don't care who gets the credit. - Anonymous