On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 08:39:56PM -0500, Jeff Sheinberg wrote: > So, show me the port for sendmail.
sendmail is in the base OS. MySQL, which you used for your example, is not. > The Debian package maintainer takes care of these `insignificant > details'. Since there is no BSD port of sendmail, voila, no > `insignificant details' to worry about. Is there a Debian package for every last program? No, there is your base deb which contains several. Your complaint is that FreeBSD's base OS is too big. That is debated constantly. > As soon as BSD removes sendmail from the base system, and makes it > into a port there will be no `fork', and as long as one can then > remove the sendmail port, or cleanly upgrade the sendmail port, > and/or replace it with, eg, the exim port. Is sendmail being in the base OS your only complaint? > And just one other `minor' requirement to prevent a `fork' - > remove the compile time dependencies from the base programs upon > the currently installed BSD kernel. The dependencies exist really only on programs that access procfs. If you've got patches to help fix this, they'd be appreciated. > Ironically, if you guys just thought about it a little, and > cleaned up the current situation in BSD as I am suggesting, then > BSD would be much better off for it. And then debian-bsd would > just wither away and die. I think that is what we are trying to do first. > It seems to me that your definition of `fork' means any > non-commercial use of BSD that is in any way different from the > `official' BSD releases. In which the source changes are not incorporated into both branches. -Dan
