From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 25 00:55:57 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 388E216A4CE; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:55:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.des.no (flood.des.no [217.116.83.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A498F43D48; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:55:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: by smtp.des.no (Pony Express, from userid 666) id 54B695309; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:55:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.228.37]) by smtp.des.no (Pony Express) with ESMTP id 95F165308; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:55:48 +0100 (CET) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id 5824533C6C; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:55:48 +0100 (CET) To: Doug Barton References: <200403232227.i2NMRQn5042762@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040324164155.GA4737@dragon.nuxi.com> <20040324135211.T88409@qbhto.arg> From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:55:48 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20040324135211.T88409@qbhto.arg> (Doug Barton's message of "Wed, 24 Mar 2004 13:54:58 -0800 (PST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.090024 (Oort Gnus v0.24) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on flood.des.no X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.63 cc: "cvs-src@FreeBSD.org" cc: "src-committers@FreeBSD.org" cc: "cvs-all@FreeBSD.org" cc: David O'Brien Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin Makefile src/usr.bin/doscmd AsyncIO.c AsyncIO.h Makefile Makefile.dos PROBLEMS ParseBuffer.c README README.booting_dos bios.c callback.c callback.h cmos.c com.h config.c cp X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 08:55:57 -0000 Doug Barton writes: > 1. Can we remove doscmd from the base and make it a port? > 2. NO! doscmd works and I use it! > 3. But we can easily make doscmd a port. > 4. Oh, well, ok, but maybe we should wait till 6.0? > 5. At this point, tjr assented to waiting, but others mentioned that if > we're going to do it, let's do it before 5.3 so that 5-stable looks more > like what we want it to look. > 6. I heard no objections to 5. I saw 1, 2, 3 as above and then 4. Yeah right, as if *you're* going to bother. 5. Actually, I already have patches. 6. Oh, OK then. The whole discussion is pretty pointless though, since doscmd has lain more or less fallow for years and there are several equivalent but far better maintained tools in ports (pcemu, bochs...) DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no