From owner-freebsd-questions  Mon Apr 14 08:23:07 1997
Return-Path: <owner-questions>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA20409
          for questions-outgoing; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 08:23:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dutton4.it.siu.edu (dutton4.it.siu.edu [131.230.2.151])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA20404
          for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 08:23:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (jimd@localhost)
	by dutton4.it.siu.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA02206;
	Mon, 14 Apr 1997 10:26:01 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 10:26:01 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jim Dutton <jimd@dutton4.it.siu.edu>
To: Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu>
cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Newer versions of bsd...mk files anywhere?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970414003638.7719U-100000@localhost>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970414102212.2201A-100000@dutton4.it.siu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Ummm - why should I have to worry about the blinking bsd.port.mk files? If
an OS is released with 6 year old files, then it is the OS releasers that
should make sure that the appropriate files are included in the OS
release.


On Mon, 14 Apr 1997, Doug White wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Apr 1997, Jim Dutton wrote:
> 
> > Hmmm - the bsd.subdir.mk has a date of 2/1/91 in its internal comments, as
> > does bsd.port.subdir.mk.
> > 
> > The newer versions of the same files have an additional line with a 1997
> > date. How "stale" is stale??
> 
> I don't know.  :)  If it's a problem, you can bring the bsd.port.mk down
> from -current and replace yours.