OpenBSD's netcat in base or ports?

[Brooks Davis]

On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:20:14PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <20050126022936.GI692 at empiric.icir.org>
>             Bruce M Simpson <bms at spc.org> writes:
> : On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 01:46:30PM -0500, Coleman Kane wrote:
> : > This is only my personal opinion. I think the WITH_XXXX_OVERWITE_BASE
> : > make options help substantiate it, however.
> : 
> : I've recently updated the tcpdump port to fix a number of issues. If
> : people could confirm that the OVERWRITE_BASE option still works there,
> : I should be most grateful.
> 
> For something as simple and useful as nc, I'd rather see it in the
> base system than as a port.  It is useful enough to enough people that
> the extra care and feeding it will get in the base is worth the extra
> burdon it places on us to do that.  It doesn't duplicate things in the
> base system, and provides functionality that's useful to many people.

netcat does something so simple (hook some file descriptors together
until something closes them), it always suprises me to remember that
there's no library function to do this.  To me that argues for being in
the base system.

-- Brooks

-- 
Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE.
PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529  9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/attachments/20050125/02748e99/attachment.bin