On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 09:58:06AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > Also, is there a reason to keep bsdfsck, defpager and libtreefs > > around? About libtreefs I'm a bit unsure, since it might be useful. > > But I doubt this since it hasn't been touched since 1996 (there is not > > even a ChangeLog).
> Why do you want to delete things like this? They are in-progress, > it's in the CVS source, which is the right place for things like > that. Of course they are not in the release, but that's a separate > question. I tend to think that anything that is never going to be used should be removed at least from the build environment, but preferably from CVS. The problem with having them still in the tree is that it's not obvious at a quick glance which tools are pieces aer still in use and worth learning when you're a new person. As an example, when James Morrison was doing patch reviews and sending a patch nearly every week a frequent response was "That code is never used". Tks, Jeff Bailey _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
