Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:03:15 +0100 (MET)
From:      J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de>
To:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD-current users)
Subject:   Re: 2.2-960226-SNAP now on ftp.freebsd.org
Message-ID:  <199603060903.KAA10635@uriah.heep.sax.de>
In-Reply-To: <4961.826090034@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Mar 5, 96 09:27:14 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:

> > . /sbin/init and /bin/ed in the `filesys' are the DES versions.  You
> >   might wanna care for this when releasing it on a CD.
> 
> Thanks, Mark and I are looking into it.  It's odd.

It's not too odd.  Somebody (ache?) modified the Makefile to DTRT for
a regular build environment.  This involves building the DES versions
only if /usr/src/secure exists.  I've modified the Makefiles again to
also build the non-DES version if ``RELEASEDIR'' is set (this is only
the case while building a release), but the statically linked binaries
using -lcrypt remain to be the DES-encumbered ones.  You have to
relink them somewhere after moving the DES versions away for the `des'
distribution.  /sbin/init and /bin/[r]ed are the only binaries
statically linked against -lcrypt (to the best of my knowledge).

> > . A friend of mine has been reporting serious troubles with a pppd PPP
> >   server against IIJPPP clients (the server used to work fine with
> >   2.1R).  I've temporarily compile-time disabled CCP on his machine to
> >   get it at least running again.
> 
> Hmmmm!  This one may not be fixed by the time the snap is regenerated.

I've got a four-liner for review to Peter W. and Poul-Henning that
simply closes down the CCP layer if no matching compression protocol
could be negotiated.

> I agree, but in the meantime it's just 2 extra lines in the .login
> and .profile (.cshrc never contained a stty and should not have?).

Don't forget /.profile, for the single-user shell.

> > . We need a compat2x distribution, and this one must be offered for
> >   installation when it comes to XFree86(tm).  libc.so.2.2 must be in
> >   it.
> 
> Would someone here care to make one?  I always get stuck making
> the compat* dists, and there are always complaints! :-)

Ick.  (Shyly looking around to find a volunteer.  Awww.  Nobody pops
up!  Silently retreating from the scene, leaving the volunteers alone
there. :-)

> > . The installation floppy seems to miss allot of documentation that
> >   used to be there.
> 
> Can you be more specific?

I could select whatever menu item from the ``Documentation'' menu, and
only got ``Sorry, this ain't here''.  Of course, this was for my own
SNAP, so if it's there in your version i assume you've done some extra
work besides ``make release''?

> > Further, using the latest XFree86 betas against a -current system
> > shows strange effects.

> Interesting.  I've never tried any of the betas, but this certainly
> leads me think that I'm better off not sticking 3.1.2D on there! :-)

Wait for release time...

-- 
cheers, J"org

joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603060903.KAA10635>