Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 13:58:48 -0500 From: "David E. Cross" <crossd@cs.rpi.edu> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, nate@mt.sri.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: linux software installation and uname Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.4.05.9811091355590.5731-100000@o2.cs.rpi.edu> In-Reply-To: <199811091855.KAA10694@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 9 Nov 1998, Steve Kargl wrote: > ... > The install script on the cdrom had hardcoded tests for > /usr/bin/uname and /bin/uname. They should not do that; they are making the assumption that they know better than you how your machine ought to be setup. > > If we every get to the emulation of Digital Unix and Solaris > where we have /compat/linux, /compat/digital, /compat/solaris, > etc., then we need several versions of uname. Now, we're talking > about bloat. Bloat for some, or bloat for all. If you merge it into the main tree *everyone* gets that bloat, and then who is responsible for maintaining 'uname'? If you break it out into the individual directories then only those who require the mentioned functionality will suffer the bloat; and it would be easy to setup a clear maintainer for the code. Bloat is more than just code bloat, it is administrative bloat as well. -- David Cross To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SGI.4.05.9811091355590.5731-100000>