From owner-freebsd-arch Sat Apr 8 8:19: 6 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57E1B37B54C for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2000 08:18:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA05565 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2000 17:22:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id RAA00569 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Sat, 8 Apr 2000 17:18:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.79.126]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B81037BA6D; Sat, 8 Apr 2000 08:18:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nate@yogotech.com) Received: from nomad.yogotech.com (nomad.yogotech.com [206.127.79.115]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA15430; Sat, 8 Apr 2000 09:16:18 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate@nomad.yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by nomad.yogotech.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA09183; Sat, 8 Apr 2000 09:16:16 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2000 09:16:16 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200004081516.JAA09183@nomad.yogotech.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Warner Losh Cc: Chuck Robey , Bob Bishop , obrien@freebsd.org, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Import of tcsh into src/contrib/, replacing src/usr.bin/csh In-Reply-To: <200004080525.XAA04514@harmony.village.org> References: <200004080525.XAA04514@harmony.village.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.34 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > : Bleah. David, go try talking them into replacing vi with Vim. I'll go > : get a soda, pull up a chair, and watch the fur fly! If we're gonna have a > : stupid donnybrook, let's really get into it! > > One can argue that tcsh is really csh version N+1. There's already a > precident in the tree when we replaced vi with nvi, which is vi > version N + 1. Actually, nvi replaced elvis, so this analogy breaks down. The original vi is still not free software, so we've never had access to it in FreeBSD. > And look at how much sendmail has grown since FreeBSD 1.0, yet you > don't hear calls for removing it from the system due to its size > (other reasons, yes, but not its size). Actually, size has alot to do with it. It's big/bloated, so it's harder to verify that it's correct and secure. > And look how much bigger the new bind is than the older one. That > that was a huge, incompatible change with config files even. Ahh, but in the case of bind, we have no choice in the matter. Either we use the new version of bind, or we don't get to play on the net. (And, most folks on the net are still running the old, smaller version of 4.9.7). > Oh, and did I mention xntpd vs ntpd? Heck, the name even changed > there an no one batted an eye, once they got a couple of niggles with > the config files ironed out. That's cause most folks don't run ntp. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message