From owner-freebsd-ports  Sun Jan 18 05:48:28 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA04627
          for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Sun, 18 Jan 1998 05:48:28 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from spinner.netplex.com.au (root@spinner.netplex.com.au [202.12.86.3])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA03459;
          Sun, 18 Jan 1998 05:36:11 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au)
Received: from spinner.netplex.com.au (peter@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by spinner.netplex.com.au (8.8.8/8.8.8/Spinner) with ESMTP id LAA07487;
	Sun, 18 Jan 1998 11:11:00 +0800 (WST)
	(envelope-from peter@spinner.netplex.com.au)
Message-Id: <199801180311.LAA07487@spinner.netplex.com.au>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97
To: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru>
cc: Eivind Eklund <perhaps@yes.no>, Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu>,
        gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, committers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: amanda port, empty PATCH_STRIP= lines causes trouble 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 17 Jan 1998 17:39:12 +0300."
             <Pine.BSF.3.96.980117173426.6782A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net> 
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 11:10:59 +0800
From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

=?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= wrote:
[..]
> 
> Well, personally I don't deal with 2.2 so can't know all pitfails there.
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

As Elvind wrote:
> * Andrey Chernov
> | We could not spent time to understanding, just upgrade -stable to
> | new patch as I suggest.
> 
> * Satoshi Asami
> | No.
>
> * Andrey Chernov
> | Why?

You have just answered your own question FAR better than any of us could.
2.2 is supposedly in stable mode, which means only tested, considered, well
understood changes that DON'T make major incompatable behavior changes are
appropriate.

I feel that it would have been far more appropriate to make a PORT of the 
new patch to give the dust some time to settle rather than causing turmoil 
in the base system.  I personally believe the best thing would be to back 
out the new patch ASAP.

Cheers,
-Peter