Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 01:59:45 +0200 From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@FreeBSD.org> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: xditview Message-ID: <199606182359.BAA24239@vector.jhs.no_domain> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 18 Jun 1996 07:35:28 PDT." <292.835108528@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Reference: > From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> > > Well, if ones source tree were 99% X source code free, wouldn't you be > tempted to go for that final 1%? :-) Yes, If it had never gone in it would have been fine, or if it had been in only a short while, but it seems dubious from a quality control viewpoint, to now remove a facility CD users have had at least 2 releases to get used to having available (2.0.5 & 2.1). A simple .if exist .... SUBDIR += would suffice, wouldn't it ?. > In any case, I think the handwriting is on the wall for a different > approach to packages like groff and gcc (encapsulation) and, if/when > that happens, things like xditview will magically "come back" for > free. Shudder ... `unbundling' Eh ? Stripped down op. systems with optional C compiler & text processing systems ? however, there might be a benefit to not having to BSD-make convert the mega FSF distribs such as gcc & groff etc, each time they upgrade. Julian -- Julian H. Stacey jhs@freebsd.org http://www.freebsd.org/~jhs/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606182359.BAA24239>