Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 17:05:00 +0200 From: Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libutil in Debian Message-ID: <CAOfDtXOTqzF9=s%2BUv6%2BMoAu0nrmyGrxJz4xaSJYEfDzRvrKx8g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20130709113553.GP67810@FreeBSD.org> References: <CAOfDtXN2fWQAyGNb_ifH9y=zHO%2BGGnSdWnD8C6BzWDTU_7rWFQ@mail.gmail.com> <20130709113553.GP67810@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Gleb, 2013/7/9 Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>: > With all respect to GNU and Debian the libutil in BSD appeared in 1988, > and the fact that GNU has taken that name in 1996 isn't reason for BSD > to change name. Thanks for pointing this out. Please note that my request is only based on practical grounds. It shouldn't be interpreted as implying endorsement on Glibc's use of libutil name. Historically, Glibc maintainer has been very difficult to deal with. This has affected non-Linux ports of Glibc as well. In contrast, FreeBSD community may or may not agree with proposals but is at least open to discuss things. This (rather than "fairness") is the reason I try to work things out here and not there. Please take it as a compliment rather than as offence :-) > Also, FreeBSD is just one of the BSD descendants, and all of them share > the libutil. So, I take it that the change I'm proposing could have disruptive effects. I do think there are long-term advantages for FreeBSD and the other BSD descendants in making it easy for their APIs to be deployed elsewhere. I mean, in terms of portability. However I'm clearly biased so I'd rather not insist on this. I leave it for you to judge. Thanks! -- Robert Millan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOfDtXOTqzF9=s%2BUv6%2BMoAu0nrmyGrxJz4xaSJYEfDzRvrKx8g>