Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 14:42:57 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: pechter@lakewood.com Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, dk+@ua.net, mike@smith.net.au, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: UUCP (important clarification) Message-ID: <19971007144257.56917@lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <199710061102.HAA01674@i4got.lakewood.com>; from Bill Pechter on Mon, Oct 06, 1997 at 07:02:55AM -0400 References: <2369.876125643@time.cdrom.com> <199710061102.HAA01674@i4got.lakewood.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Oct 06, 1997 at 07:02:55AM -0400, Bill Pechter wrote: >>> Who can decide on this? Is there a conspiracy behind it? ;-) >> >> Given that I don't particularly *care* about UUCP in the first place, >> I really don't mind what goes into 2.2.5 as far as this is concerned. >> >> Anyone masochistic enough to still use UUCP in this day and age is >> also capable of fixing any breakage that may occur, I think. Go for it. ;) > > Masochistic 8-) > > UUCP is much easier to configure than, say gated.conf! Interesting discussion. I didn't realize how many UUCP users there are still out there, and how protective they are :-) Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19971007144257.56917>