--UFHRwCdBEJvubb2X
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 06:28:12PM +0300, Elad Efrat wrote:
> matthew green wrote:
>=20
> > not sure i really see the benefit.  do other systems do this?
>=20
> OpenBSD.
>=20
> > what's the compelling reason behind it?
>=20
> Since we already have include/crypto, it's only logical to have
> the headers that are related to crypto inside, I think. If that's
> not a welcome step (for whatever reason that may be) I won't
> argue over it. What I'm more looking to do is the other changes
> I mentioned.

I think the libc changes sound fine, but I'm not an expert there.

If you want to move headers around, I vote for leaving a header where it=20
is now (don't symlink) but have it include the one from include/crypto.

I've had negative experiences in the past with headers turning into=20
symlinks between updates. If we don't have to, I'd vote we don't do that.=
=20
:-)

Take care,

Bill

--UFHRwCdBEJvubb2X
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFDBmIdWz+3JHUci9cRAs0pAJ4nVsRgXTMU6lYaRWlu3wb3DSAJSACghZ+1
bbCqNPcezYtSgtyHtRQF14Q=
=IkWr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--UFHRwCdBEJvubb2X--