Subject: Re: Removing cvs from basesrc.
To: Todd Vierling <email@example.com>
From: Manuel Bouyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/10/2000 17:41:30
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 10:51:54AM -0500, Todd Vierling wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2000, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> : > This message hereby opens discussion on this topic.
> : I think it was in basesrc because anoncvs is now one way to get sources ?
> Known response. I don't see the reason for it to be in basesrc based on
> this statement. `Just use pkg_add on a binary....' CVS just isn't the kind
> of moving target that, say, NetBSD-current sources are, so all it really
> does is add yet more time to a build.
Ok, then this restarts an old thread: we need a list of 'base' binary
packages that need to be available for all architectures.
`Just use pkg_add on a binary....' Where are the binary packages for my 1.5
ultrasparc or sun3 ?
> : If we move cvs to pkgsrc, maybe we should move sup as well ?
> Known response. Sup isn't well-maintained externally, and we've done
> modifications on it since its last (very old) third-party release, so it
> does have good reason to be under basesrc's revision control. However, were
> a third party to take up sup and keep it well maintained external to NetBSD,
> I would agree here too.
What's wrong with localsrc ?
Anyway once the base system is pkgised this is less an issue.
Manuel Bouyer, LIP6, Universite Paris VI. Manuel.Bouyer@lip6.fr