Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 10:18:46 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: pechter@lakewood.com, dk+@ua.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: UUCP (important clarification) Message-ID: <19971004101846.12337@lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <199710031430.AAA00858@word.smith.net.au>; from Mike Smith on Sat, Oct 04, 1997 at 12:00:44AM %2B0930 References: <199710031354.JAA04901@i4got.lakewood.com> <199710031430.AAA00858@word.smith.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Oct 04, 1997 at 12:00:44AM +0930, Mike Smith wrote: >> I still think that FreeBSD should adopt the position of supporting HDB >> V2 uucp configuration files in the system. (I have to rebuild uucp >> after all the make worlds with my own patches to do so...) > > You are not helping yourself by not being clear. > > You do not mean "the Taylor configuration format should be abandoned in > favour of the HDB and V2 formats", you mean "the UUCP suite should be > built with support for the Taylor, HDB and V2 configuration formats". > > ie. HAVE_HDB_CONFIG and HAVE_V2_CONFIG should be set to 1 in /usr/src/ > gnu/libexec/uucp/common_source/policy.h. > > This wouldn't cost anything functionality-wise, and would make Bill > happy. Can we achieve enough consensus on this to make it into 2.2.5? It's a good thing that you said this. I misunderstood Bill, and I'm sure a lot of other people do. I agree with this suggestion, and not what I understood Bill to have said. I can't really see this getting changed for 2.2.5, though. Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19971004101846.12337>