From owner-freebsd-current Tue Oct 31 23:16:06 1995 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id XAA27826 for current-outgoing; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 23:16:06 -0800 Received: from apollo.COSC.GOV (root@apollo.COSC.GOV [198.94.103.34]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id XAA27819 ; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 23:16:03 -0800 Received: (from vince@localhost) by apollo.COSC.GOV (8.6.12/8.6.9) id XAA27315; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 23:13:16 -0800 Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 23:13:15 -0800 (PST) From: -Vince- To: Julian Elischer cc: jc@irbs.com, current@FreeBSD.org, FAQ@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.1 update In-Reply-To: <199511010713.XAA21794@ref.tfs.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 31 Oct 1995, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > On Tue, 31 Oct 1995, John Capo wrote: > > > > I'll take a look at that so I don't really need to reinstall from > > floppies? Isn't the -current tree supposed to be newer than the -stable > > tree and will the -current tree become atleast 2.1? > think of it this way: > > /---->2.1 /->2.2 > / / > 1.0---->1.1---->1.1.5->X /---->2.0---->2.0.5---+----------+-->? > ---- ^ > BSD4.4--------------/ | > | > -current is presently HERE > I'm not sure if the next 'stabel' > release will be based on 2.1 or 2.2 > but I draw it as being 2.2 here So it is really ahead of stable or 2.1 in the code? Cheers, -Vince- vince@COSC.GOV - GUS Mailing Lists Admin UC Berkeley AstroPhysics - Electrical Engineering (Honorary B.S.) Chabot Observatory & Science Center - Board of Advisors Running FreeBSD - Real UN*X for Free! Linda Wong/Vivian Chow/Hacken Lee/Danny Chan Fan Club Mailiing Lists Admin