From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 31 09:58:32 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 058EA16A4CE for ; Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:58:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net (rwcrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.198.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D762743D48 for ; Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:58:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-24-17-47-224.client.comcast.net[24.17.47.224]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with ESMTP id <200403311758310130016c8ne>; Wed, 31 Mar 2004 17:58:31 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i2VHxdsE061555 for ; Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:59:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i2VHxYI3061554; Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:59:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org From: underway@comcast.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 09:59:33 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Reasonable Discussion, berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Why is my /stand/ much older than my FreeBSD? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 17:58:32 -0000 I have a /stand/ with entries dated 18'dec'02 while I've CVSUP'd and built several versions of 4.x and 5.x since. I'm guessing that 18'dec'02 was my last CD install and that's what installed /stand/. Correct? Why doesn't it get updated or removed? Why is there both a /stand/sysinstall and a /usr/sbin/sysinstall ? Since I have the latter, may I delete /stand/ without loosing anything useful? The FAQ and Handbook refer only to "/stand/sysinstall". That seems wrong, if it's going to be an obsolete version. Comments, please. Thanks.