*BSD News Article 27340


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