Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:36:09 -0700 From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> To: Dominic Marks <dominic_marks@btinternet.com> Cc: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ¤t;/&stable; entities for consistent naming Message-ID: <20010601053609.89E953E2F@bazooka.unixfreak.org> In-Reply-To: <20010531094035.A405@host213-123-133-158.btopenworld>; from dominic_marks@btinternet.com on "Thu, 31 May 2001 09:40:35 %2B0100"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dominic Marks <dominic_marks@btinternet.com> writes: > Hi > > On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 10:23:52PM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote: > > > > It's probably of no technical concern, but I like > > &os.(current|stable);, so I think we should use that. > > > > Anybody else have any comments on this or shall I go ahead? > > Why not go the whole way and put in &os.release; It seems silly to leave > it out of the series even though its a snapshot of stable many FreeBSD > learners might not know that. Just a thought. -RELEASE isn't mentioned that much in the docs, and when it is it's mentioned with a number. When the docs refer to "stable" they usually mean "pretty much anything on the -stable branch". Very little docs refer to "pretty much any release"; it's almost always a specific release. Thus, unless we want to make entities for every release (which is counter-intuitive, since they won't get that much use) it's rather pointless. Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010601053609.89E953E2F>