perhaps... but what is the consensus? That we would rather not have any other tools built with openafs - i.e. keep them all independent? Or that we should make it as easy as possible for new sites to do it one of the ways that we suggest?
If nothing else, let's at least get it as a module on openafs.org cvs so that we can have a canonical location for the tools and source. -- Nathan ------------------------------------------------------------ Nathan Neulinger EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] University of Missouri - Rolla Phone: (573) 341-4841 Computing Services Fax: (573) 341-4216 > -----Original Message----- > From: Derrick J Brashear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 3:31 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OpenAFS-devel] tools and additional autoconf options... > > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Neulinger, Nathan wrote: > > > Since we're starting to add other tools - what's the policy/general > > consensus on adding support for other afs related tools? > > This is just for the test suite and not anything general, so drawing > conclusions is pretty meaningless. > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel > _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
