Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/libexec/httpd
To: Mindaugas R. <>
From: Bill Stouder-Studenmund <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 10/16/2007 13:27:33
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 09:35:56PM +0300, Mindaugas R. wrote:
> > Module Name:	src
> > Committed By:	tls
> > Date:		Tue Oct 16 01:14:07 UTC 2007
> >=20
> > Update of /cvsroot/src/libexec/httpd
> > In directory
> >=20
> > Log Message:
> > Import of bozohttpd for its originally intended purpose: a small (~30k)
> > simple run-from-inetd httpd suitable for small systems (and some large
> > ones).
> Why it was not discussed on <tech-userlevel> and/or other mailing lists? =
> pkgsrc is not enough?

I'd say because bozohttpd is excellent for using in an embedded device.=20
And we tout how we're good for embedded. We used it at Wasabi, Thor's=20
using it, and a few other folks are using it too. By putting it in base,=20

1) Reduce duplication. By having it in base, we reduce patch maintenance=20
duplication and other bits of code maintenance. We reduce the effort to=20
make it cross-compile since it is part of base.

2) Provide something out of the box that a number of folks want.

> I do not think it is a good way to import such applications into the base
> source tree, at least while there is no appropriate support for syspkgs.

Why? I agree we don't want to put everything in base. But on a=20
case-by-case basis, I think it's fine if not appropriate to put stuff in=20
base. This seems like a good fit for base.

It also stays out of the way. It's in libexec, so no one will find it by=20

Take care,


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

Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (NetBSD)