From owner-freebsd-stable Fri May 17 06:59:40 1996 Return-Path: owner-stable Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id GAA18241 for stable-outgoing; Fri, 17 May 1996 06:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from distortion.eng.umd.edu (distortion.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.6]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA18236; Fri, 17 May 1996 06:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maryann.eng.umd.edu (maryann.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.209]) by distortion.eng.umd.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA12806; Fri, 17 May 1996 09:59:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from chuckr@localhost) by maryann.eng.umd.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA26502; Fri, 17 May 1996 09:59:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 09:59:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey X-Sender: chuckr@maryann.eng.umd.edu To: Richard Wackerbarth cc: FreeBSD Current , FreeBSD Hackers , "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" , Nate Williams Subject: Re: Re(2): Standard Shipping Containers - A Proposal for Distributing FreeBSD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-stable@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On 16 May 1996, Richard Wackerbarth wrote: > > Since those who have the direct access are not really inhibited by this > proposal, I suggest that you reconsider it in view of the other 99.99% of the > folks for whom my assumptions apply. > > I hope there is somebody out there who cares about the difficulties of the > "average joe" and doesn't simply brush off those problems because they are a > member of the elite class who get to play by their own rules. If you would make clear that your realize that your comments don't apply to those who are net connected, you wouldn't have everyone complaining. Your comments so far have been incorrect in how sup and ctm really work. No one would argue about upgrading ctm, but you seem to be making claims about both sup and ctm that don't apply to both. You ask who cares about those not net-connected, but your own comments seem to betray a prejudice against those who ARE net-connected. How about caring for both? That's why there's TWO tools, not one. > > -- > > ...computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh > only 1/2 tons. -- Popular Mechanics, March 1949 > > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------