Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 2 Mar 2005 17:27:34 +0900
From:      Sangwoo Shim <ssw@neo.redjade.org>
To:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Cc:        freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: How about import mpd into base system?
Message-ID:  <20050302082734.GA25310@neo.redjade.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050302081729.GA76106@xor.obsecurity.org>
References:  <200503011650.j21GoI7o018125@peedub.jennejohn.org> <61202.1109698143@critter.freebsd.dk> <20050302081019.GA25222@neo.redjade.org> <20050302081729.GA76106@xor.obsecurity.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 12:17:30AM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 05:10:19PM +0900, Sangwoo Shim wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 06:29:03PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> > > In message <200503011650.j21GoI7o018125@peedub.jennejohn.org>, Gary Jennejohn w
> > > rites:
> > > >
> > > >Sangwoo Shim writes:
> > > >> Mpd is likely to be used by FreeBSD (and might DFBSD) exclusively. So, how
> > > >> about import mpd into the base tree? Is there any stopper to prevent mpd from
> > > >> being included into the tree?
> > > >> 
> > > >
> > > >Why? /usr/sbin/ppp supports PPPoE just fine and is already in the base.
> > > 
> > > They should be merged.
> > > 
> > > mpd-netgraph has functionality missing in the ppp in the base system.
> > 
> > Exactly my opinion. I'm glad to know you think like that!
> > Hmm, I'm curious whether there is any commiter planning mpd import.
> 
> He said 'merged', as in 'combined into one program instead of having
> two (three, including pppd) separate ppp implementations that do
> almost the same thing'.
> 
> Kris

Ah, now I'm stand corrected. I should study more English. (sigh)
Thanks for clarification.

Regards,
Sangwoo Shim



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050302082734.GA25310>