From owner-freebsd-current  Tue Sep 24 12:25:29 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA21155
          for current-outgoing; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 12:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA21142
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 12:25:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.6/8.6.9) with ESMTP id MAA07282; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 12:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>,
        current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: install on {Net,Open}BSD vs install on FreeBSD 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 24 Sep 1996 09:30:16 MDT."
             <199609241530.JAA06226@rover.village.org> 
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 12:16:30 -0700
Message-ID: <7280.843592590@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Sorry to sound a little frustrated, but the grabbing the code from
> NetBSD, putting it into FreeBSD's install and testing it took less
> time than I've spent writing email on this topic.

That's because you forgot the cardinal rule of FreeBSD development:
It's easier to apologise afterwards than ask permision beforehand. :-)

[Yes folks, I'm mostly joking, but there have been more than a few
 instances where we'd have all been better off had a given problem
 been solved with more coding and less talking, especially when the
 change being discussed was trivial and truly not worth an extended
 debate]

					Jordan