Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:24:16 -0500 (EST) From: "Mike Jakubik" <mikej@rogers.com> To: "Rob" <spamrefuse@yahoo.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: names of supfiles in /usr/share/examples/cvsup Message-ID: <65174.207.219.213.163.1102357456.squirrel@207.219.213.163> In-Reply-To: <41B40C97.7000102@yahoo.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Rob said: > > Hi, > > For 5.3 in /usr/share/examples/cvsup, there's: > > stable-supfile : for FreeBSD-stable > standard-supfile : for FreeBSD-current > > I find this naming rather confusing. Why "stable" refers to STABLE, but > "standard" refers to CURRENT ? > > This causes unnecessary confusion. Why not the following name convention: > > release-supfile : for FreeBSD-RELEASE > stable-supfile : for FreeBSD-STABLE > current-supfile : for FreeBSD-CURRENT > > as default supplied files in /usr/share/examples/cvsup ? I agree with you. It has been weird like this ever since 5.x. In the 4.x days they were named with some common sense.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?65174.207.219.213.163.1102357456.squirrel>