Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 09:40:51 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cu(1) (Was: Re: cvs commit: src/etc/mtree BSD.var.dist) Message-ID: <20011027094051.C573@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20011027075037.N90149-100000@delplex.bde.org>; from bde@zeta.org.au on Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 08:01:36AM %2B1000 References: <200110261659.f9QGxXY47978@grimreaper.grondar.org> <20011027075037.N90149-100000@delplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday, 27 October 2001 at 8:01:36 +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Fri, 26 Oct 2001, Mark Murray wrote: > >>>> If we are keeping uucp junk around for cu(1), why is cu(1) not a port? >>>> Alternatively, what are the desirable features of cu(1) that tip(1) really >>>> needs to be able to do? >>> >>> I can just type 'cu -l /dev/cuaa0 -s 115200' w/o needing to setup an entry in >>> /etc/remote. i.e., laziness. :) >> >> Aaaaah! The thot plickens :-) >> >> Do you have a problem with cu being a port and not in the base system? >> >> (ie, a port that gives you _just_ cu with no other UUCP crap?) > > Yes. cu(1) is one of the oldest unix utilities. It should be moved to > ports long after things like rain(6). I actually normally use my own > terminal program, since cu is too bloated: > > text data bss dec hex filename > 419851 6716 76560 503127 7ad57 /usr/bin/cu > 340083 7548 64816 412447 64b1f /usr/bin/tip > 9873 132 2432 12437 3095 /home/bde/bin/term > > (all statically linked). So why haven't you committed it? Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011027094051.C573>