Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 15:05:34 -0500 From: "Donald J . Maddox" <dmaddox@sc.rr.com> To: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu>, Clive Lin <clive@CirX.ORG>, "Donald J . Maddox" <dmaddox@sc.rr.com>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/dictd Makefile pkg-plist Message-ID: <20010128150534.A24063@cae88-102-101.sc.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <20010128145934.C1518@puck.firepipe.net>; from will@physics.purdue.edu on Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 02:59:34PM -0500 References: <200101281916.f0SJGf219672@freefall.freebsd.org> <20010128142529.A23690@cae88-102-101.sc.rr.com> <20010129035349.A77072@cartier.cirx.org> <20010128145934.C1518@puck.firepipe.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 02:59:34PM -0500, Will Andrews wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:53:49AM +0800, Clive Lin wrote: > > The dear dict client could be found net/dict. > > > > I think there's a sufficient reason. People who want the client > > may not want the server installed. For example, I have several > > BSD boxes around me. I only need one server and other machines > > could live well without server (and the fat fat, really bloated > > dictionary databases) installed. > > > > Errr, sounds weird, isn't ? > > > > In fact, I do think as what you think originally, until another > > committer tells me this reason :-) > > I think net/dict & net/dictd is The Right Way (tm). :-) > Having separate packages would be great, IMO. Yes, this logic is fine, except that currently there is no net/dict port. If somebody wants to create a whole 'nother port just for that one tiny binary (the client) that's fine too :) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010128150534.A24063>