Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 17:59:33 +0100 From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cu(1) (Was: Re: cvs commit: src/etc/mtree BSD.var.dist) Message-ID: <200110261659.f9QGxXY47978@grimreaper.grondar.org> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.011026030937.jhb@FreeBSD.org> ; from John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> "Fri, 26 Oct 2001 03:09:37 PDT." References: <XFMail.011026030937.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > If we are keeping uucp junk around for cu(1), why is cu(1) not a port? > > Alternatively, what are the desirable features of cu(1) that tip(1) really > > needs to be able to do? > > I can just type 'cu -l /dev/cuaa0 -s 115200' w/o needing to setup an entry in > /etc/remote. i.e., laziness. :) Aaaaah! The thot plickens :-) Do you have a problem with cu being a port and not in the base system? (ie, a port that gives you _just_ cu with no other UUCP crap?) M -- o Mark Murray \_ FreeBSD Services Limited O.\_ Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200110261659.f9QGxXY47978>