Gary Winiger wrote:
>> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>>
>>> And the rationale is quite simple -- more code in Solaris == more
>>> effort to sustain, support, larger install image, bigger download,
>>> generally more "bloat".
>>>
>> I disagree.
>>
>> I strongly *suspect* it is less effort to "sustain, support" the
>> plethora of FOSS ftp versions by minimizing the changes to that version,
>> including a proposed "wrapper" implementation.
>>
Clarification:
I was asking if it *already* could do this (or some trivial wrapper --
e.g. a shell script to convert flag operands, or just a hard link if the
newer commands are a precise superset- or close enough to one that it
doesn't matter).
I wasn't asking anyone to change the sources received from upstream.
-- Garrett
PS:
As far as any one "size does matter but its in the noise" -- the problem
is we are dying from a thousand cuts, IMO. If nobody cares about an
additional 1MB (or even 100K) of bloat introduced by their project, then
ultimately Solaris turns into a lumbering pig instead of the sleek
peregrine that I think many of us would rather it be.
(I am one of those developers -- and I think I'm in the minority here --
that actually cares about bloat, and believes that systems should get
faster, not slower, as time goes on. In other words I believe that the
fight against the tendency of system software to consume all available
system resources (memory, cpu, disk, bandwidth) is worth fighting. If I
believed differently, maybe I'd be happier working on other operating
systems -- such as one produced in Redmond.)
