From owner-freebsd-current Sun Jul 9 09:25:34 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id JAA03247 for current-outgoing; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 09:25:34 -0700 Received: from mail.barrnet.net (mail.barrnet.net [131.119.246.7]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA03240 for ; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 09:25:33 -0700 Received: from dataplex.net (SHARK.DATAPLEX.NET [199.183.109.241]) by mail.barrnet.net (8.6.10/MAIL-RELAY-LEN) with ESMTP id JAA00954 for ; Sun, 9 Jul 1995 09:25:30 -0700 Received: from [199.183.109.242] by dataplex.net with SMTP (MailShare 1.0b8); Sun, 9 Jul 1995 11:25:26 -0500 X-Sender: wacky@shark.dataplex.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 9 Jul 1995 11:25:28 -0500 To: Poul-Henning Kamp From: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) Subject: Re: Version numbers of the different branches? Cc: current@freebsd.org Sender: current-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk >> IMHO, "2.1d0803" where 0803 represents the CTM update level >> or "2.1d950706" where that represents the date of the source file sup >> would be more useful. > >The CTM sequence number will not be put into it. CTM has nothing to >do with our kernel. I was not advocating that CTM be the trigger mechanism. I was just using it as an example of the type of information that would be keyed to the file updates. >If anything we should have a cronjob update the version-string automatically >every day. The idea of a cron-job update is fine except that it should not update unless something else has changed. Remember that this same scheme will also need to work for the -stable tree. Obviously, that date will end up changing only occasionally. ---- Richard Wackerbarth rkw@dataplex.net