Re: removing RIP/RIPng (routed/route6d)

Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.freebsd.devel.net
Message-ID <CAFYkXjm_smbDBw4o+=H9u1G39BPmEYWD-kb9+LwcT-vcX7SAUg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 3:03 PM Lexi Winter <[email protected]> wrote:
> (..)
> almost anything would be useful for someone, somewhere.  for example,
> i'd quite like to see a basic Wayland compositor (such as hikari) and a
> terminal emulator in the base system, because that's a bit nicer to use
> than vt(4) if you just need to occasionally manage a system via the
> framebuffer console.  i feel fairly confident to say that this would be
> useful to a greater number of people than an implementation of RIP.

If that takes around 10MB its worth considering.. may be helpful for
visual oci management :-)

> would people objecting to the removal of routed also advocate for
> putting window(1) back into base?  (this is not a rhetorical question,
> 'yes' is a perfectly reasonable answer.)

The subtle difference between "removing RIP/RIPng (routed/route6d)"
and "[base->ports] moving RIP/RIPng (routed/route6d) to ports" :-)

Have a good day folks :-)

-- 
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.