Subject: Re: don't remove ksh
To: NetBSD Userlevel Technical Discussion List <email@example.com>
From: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/20/2001 13:56:35
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Greg A. Woods wrote:
# Trying to keep track of what files are part of the base system by using
# their position in the filesystem hierarchy is something like trying to
# keep track of which physical pennies are yours after you've taken them
# to the bank. You simply cannot do it reliably -- you must use a more
# formal accounting system.
That's comparing apples and twenty-sided dice. In our case, you CAN do
"More formal accounting system"? Sounds too much like a registry to me.
No, thank you!
And I hardly qualify such statements coming from you anyway, to be frank.
You'd just as soon load everything under root anyway and leave it at that.
I don't want my system built either way you've described, and I don't think
I'm alone in my statements and conviction.
Someone (besides Greg) feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
NetBSD: My Computer Runs!