Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 28 Mar 2000 17:58:07 +0100
From:      Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org>
To:        "Akinori -Aki- MUSHA" <knu@idaemons.org>
Cc:        sos@freebsd.dk, des@flood.ping.uio.no, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, sheldonh@uunet.co.za, jkh@zippy.cdrom.com, brian@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org
Subject:   Re: linux_procfs port 
Message-ID:  <200003281658.RAA18808@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org>
In-Reply-To: Message from "Akinori -Aki- MUSHA" <knu@idaemons.org>  of "Wed, 29 Mar 2000 00:22:48 %2B0900." <861z4v15mf.wl@archon.local.idaemons.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> At Tue, 28 Mar 2000 12:52:20 +0200 (CEST),
> Soren Schmidt <sos@freebsd.dk> wrote:
> > > "Akinori -Aki- MUSHA" <knu@idaemons.org> writes:
> > > > I've made a clean emulators/linux_procfs port, which holds all so=
urce
> > > > files in it under files/ so we can maintain them within our CVS t=
ree.
> > > > =

> > > > 	http://people.freebsd.org/~knu/ports/emulators/
> > > > =

> > > > Please review it and report me bugs, if any.
> > > > =

> > > > I'll commit it if no problem.
> > > =

> > > Please - the decision to take linprocfs out of the tree has not yet=

> > > been made (to the best of my knowledge). Marcel (maintainer of the
> > > so-called linuxulator) seems to be in favor of keeping it in the tr=
ee.
> > =

> > It has been decided that it should moved into the linuxulator, read
> > the mail on the list from -core. =

> > =

> > -S=F8ren
> =

> Then, should I keep my linux_procfs port unofficial?:
> =

>     http://people.freebsd.org/~knu/ports/emulators/linux_procfs.tar.gz
> =

> =

> And how about `rtc'?  I hacked up a port of it:
> =

>    http://people.freebsd.org/~knu/ports/emulators/rtc.tar.gz
> =

> This is another kernel module which provides /dev/rtc device, which is
> useful for something like VMware 2.0.
> =

> =

> And yes, ol' VMware2 port:
> =

>    http://people.freebsd.org/~knu/ports/emulators/vmware2.tar.gz
> =

> =

> So, which and which are suitable for ports?  Probably we should take
> the time for more discussion.

I think they all should be committed as ports - but after approval =

from des (he's been mucked about enough for one week :0)

> -- =

>                            /
>                           /__  __
>                          / )  )  ) )  /
> Akinori -Aki- MUSHA aka / (_ /  ( (__(  <knu@idaemons.org>
> =

> "If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice."

-- =

Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org>                        <brian@[uk.]FreeBSD.org=
>
      <http://www.Awfulhak.org>;                   <brian@[uk.]OpenBSD.org=
>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !




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?200003281658.RAA18808>