On Monday 22 May 2006 17:27, Liviu Daia wrote: > Ok, let me rephrase this. How realistic will be to run an OpenBSD > firewall or router without xbase a few years from now?
Very, in my opinion. > With the release of 3.9, there seems to be a new trend among port > maintainers to make running a systems without xbase a PITA: Eh, 2 examples arent really a PITA and does not really make a trend. > packages > of console applications now depend on X at run time even though that > could be avoided with minimal fuss (example: mrtg), It's even easier to *not* run mrtg *on* the router/firewall. SNMP, symon and pfstatd exist for a reason. Also, so far I've only seen 1 "console application" that requires X at runtime. > compiling ports that > don't depend on X at run time now requires X (example: nmap-no_x11), This depends entirely on the port in question and is not a general rule. > and building ports without xbase is now unsupported (FAQ 15.4.1). This is not really new, it has been true for quite some time although it has been an unspoken understanding and not formally documented. > what I'm asking is: is all this an accident, or the new official policy? Accident, i'd wager. --- Lars Hansson
