On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 11:22:59AM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> [ On Wednesday, October 23, 2002 at 13:18:54 (+0200), Alistair Crooks wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: RCD_SCRIPTS_DIR
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 11:24:26AM +0100, Jonathan Perkin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 11:37:34PM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > > > >  Also makes more sense in keeping pkgsrc separate to base.
> > > > 
> > > > No, not really, it doesn't at all.  The whole point of "packaging"
> > > > software is to carefully manage which files belong to which packages.
> > > > While there's no default integration yet with the lists of files which
> > > > belong to the main system, this isn't far in coming.  Once you know
> > > > the origin and "ownership" of each file then there's absolutely no
> > > > need for artifical separation of files from different origins into
> > > > different hierarchies and such inappropriate complication can be done
> > > > away with.
> > >  
> > > I was under the impression that pkgsrc was designed as a portable
> > > package manager, and as such would run many different operating systems.
> > > Obviously different operating systems have different ideas on how to
> > > implement /etc/rc.d, and installing a NetBSD-style xfstt.sh in /etc/rc.d
> > > on a RedHat box may not have the desired effect.
> > 
> > You (Jonathan) are quite correct, Greg Woods is wrong.  Please rest
> > assured that Greg Woods does not speak for the NetBSD packages team -
> > he is simply a very vocal user of pkgsrc.
> 
> You should take a _lot_ more care about what you say is "right" and what
> you say is "wrong" Mr. Crooks.

Oh, stop being so pompous.

Last time I looked, I had more of a say in setting up pkgsrc and
running it than you did, and so I think that I can speak with more
authority than you about what pkgsrc was designed to do.

Once again, to everyone reading this mailing list - Greg Woods does
not speak for the packages team, the NetBSD project, or the NetBSD
Foundation in any way.

Alistair