Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 17:23:57 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: Mike Heffner <mheffner@vt.edu> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG, obrien@freebsd.org, Luke Mewburn <lukem@wasabisystems.com> Subject: BSD-specific sources (was: Importing lukemftpd) Message-ID: <20010718172357.Q69861@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20010716212454.mheffner@novacoxmail.com>; from mheffner@novacoxmail.com on Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 09:24:54PM -0400 References: <XFMail.20010716212454.mheffner@novacoxmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, 16 July 2001 at 21:24:54 -0400, Mike Heffner wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to import Luke Mewburn's ftpd from NetBSD as the ftpd for FreeBSD. > David had originally brought up the idea of importing it back in December, but > it appears that he hasn't had the time, or other issues have come up. However, > I would like to bring up the discussion again as I think it's a needed > improvement--NetBSD's ftpd is better maintained and has better standards > compliance. > > However, when looking into it I found several issues with code divergence that > I would like advice on first (ie. PAM support, some differences in ~ expansion, > and of course differences in arguments). > > So I guess my question is, should: > > a) our ftpd and NetBSD ftpd be merged as best as possible to keep features of > both, but try to follow NetBSD's ftpd development in our tree? > > b) we import NetBSD's ftpd AS IS and treat it like vender code with regular > imports, but break backwards compatibility? > > c) we not do anything at all and leave our ftpd as it is? > > > (a) of course is the best of both worlds, but it would require more work and > might make maintainership harder in the future. > > Please let me know what people think about this. Well, interestingly enough, Luke and I were talking about cooperation between the NetBSD and FreeBSD projects just over last weekend, and one of the things that we decided was that it would be desirable to add a new category of software to our source trees, software that is used by all BSDs (well, within our terms of reference, NetBSD and FreeBSD anyway). We didn't specifically mention his ftpd: we were thinking more of things like USB support. The idea would be that we might have a separate part of the source tree, like /usr/src//contrib, which is maintained either by a group of people, or (preferably) one person who ensures that it runs on all BSD platforms. The latter might be difficult to implement, especially for kernel code, and even for userland code there would be challenges. I've got a whole lot more to say on the matter, but I'm sure that people will find a number of weaknesses in my suggestions. Feel free to pick holes in the idea. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010718172357.Q69861>