Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!news.clark.edu!netnews.nwnet.net!pnl-oracle!osi-east2.es.net!fastrac.llnl.gov!usenet.ee.pdx.edu!cs.uoregon.edu!sgiblab!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zib-berlin.de!netmbx.de!Germany.EU.net!arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de!arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de!not-for-mail From: wb@arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de (Wilhelm B. Kloke) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: GNU source tree (was: NIS (yp client) support in *BSD) Date: 16 Feb 1994 08:42:29 +0100 Organization: Inst f Arbeitsphysiologie Dortmund Lines: 32 Message-ID: <2jsip5$dra@mips.arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de> References: <2jd12b$avc@ifado.arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de> <MYCROFT.94Feb11095728@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <2jq05l$bo6@mips.arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de> <CONKLIN.94Feb15121237@ngai.kaleida.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: mips.arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de In article <CONKLIN.94Feb15121237@ngai.kaleida.com>, J.T. Conklin <conklin@kaleida.com> wrote: >> >> The bad thing in reordering the GNU tree is that Gnu is adding steadily >> new stuff, and I have different systems, e.g. Ultrix. Therefore I have to >> update my stuff sometimes from GNU. Having it twice is not a very good >> idea. And reordering stuff which is best gotten from some other source >> is a bad idea from NetBSD. Iff there are enhancements like shared libs >> this stuff should be submitted to the gnu effort. > >In my opinion, whenever a piece of software is integrated, it >_becomes_ a part of NetBSD at that time. > >The GNU packages are not the only part of NetBSD that are primarily >maintained by outside developers: cron, file, libm, m4, sendmail, etc. >I don't think that any of the software in that category is integrated >exactly as was distributed by their authors/maintainers. They are >checked in (CVS vendor branches, in most cases) in such a way that >changes in the "official" distribution can easily be integrated. In case of the gcc ist is clearly better to feed enhancements to the original release than making a release of yur own. In the long term you will spare a lot of time; and the users spare a lot of disk space, possibly. This sort of thing I hated, since DEC showed maintenance habits like adding their own interpretation of progress to BSD4.2 making Ultrix neither 4.2 nor 4.3. They also bought some software from independent companies and created their own leaf of an unproductive tree. -- Dipl.-Math. Wilhelm Bernhard Kloke Institut fuer Arbeitsphysiologie an der Universitaet Dortmund Ardeystrasse 67, D-44139 Dortmund, Tel. 0231-1084-257