From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Nov 15 15: 2:59 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from puck.firepipe.net (mcut-b-167.resnet.purdue.edu [128.211.209.167]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53AC137B479 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 15:02:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by puck.firepipe.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 74C6F18C5; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 18:02:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 18:02:57 -0500 From: Will Andrews To: Terry Lambert Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Turning on debugging in GENERIC Message-ID: <20001115180257.B26516@puck.firepipe.net> Reply-To: Will Andrews Mail-Followup-To: Will Andrews , Terry Lambert , arch@FreeBSD.org References: <20001115134312.C7752@warning.follo.net> <200011151755.KAA13742@usr01.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200011151755.KAA13742@usr01.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 05:55:54PM +0000 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.1-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 05:55:54PM +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: > Many people "try" -current on small scratch disks that they > install from snapshots, rather than polluting their local > trees with -current bits, particularly since the answer to > their bug reports is pretty much to ignore them and tell the > reporter to "resup" or ask "have you tried the snapshot?". Um, Terry, are you even on bugs@ ? The fact of life is, many folks who "try" -current that report bugs do not give enough details, so they in return get vague suggestions like these. Besides, people are told to resup when the newer -current has fixed the problem, and using a snapshot is an easy way to determine points of infection. -- wca To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message