From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Jan 16 00:20:03 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id AAA21632
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:20:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA21603
          Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:19:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA07558; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:19:41 -0800
To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@freebsd.org>
cc: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>,
        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD Hackers' list)
Subject: Re: Building a "custom" release of 2.1.0 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 15 Jan 1996 00:50:01 +0100."
             <199601142350.AAA17218@vector.jhs.local> 
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:19:41 -0800
Message-ID: <7555.821780381@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> What was the rationale for FreeBSD going over to requiring CVS just to
> produce a release ?  FreeBSD didn't use to do it that way.

Uh, it's been this way since 2.0?!

> Involving CVS takes longer, uses more disc, so why ?

Read and understand /usr/src/etc/Makefile - it explains this far more
cogently than I ever could!

					Jordan