Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 15:18:53 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: Fate of /usr/share/doc/smm/10.named Message-ID: <3D20D54D.E97E900C@mindspring.com> References: <20020701134446.E24940-100000@zoot.corp.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Barton wrote: > On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: > > Doug Barton wrote: > > > I agree with this reasoning, and also with keeping them around > > > "somewhere." The BOG is a particularly good candidate for pruning since > > > it's still available from the vendor. > > > > Things that are brought in on vendor branches should be identical > > to the contents of packages distributed by the vendors themselves. > > This is already not true because we delete a lot of other code that we > don't use, like ports for other OS'. I understand this. Particularly every time I go to cross-compile something with GCC, and have to do unnatural acts. 8-). It's a general principle. Some of the "rules" Satoshi used to have for importing code when he and I worked at the same place were that "unused things should be deleted" and "config should be run before 3rd party code was imported", and a couple of others that really tie you to a single target platform -- even a single version of an OS, if you only have one target platform to worry about. For GCC, this does really evil things to the native FreeBSD compiler sources (for example), when bmake-ing them turns out to be a really bad idea, relatively speaking. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D20D54D.E97E900C>