From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Mar 9 0: 4:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5C5EA37B719 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2001 00:04:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 26279 invoked by uid 100); 9 Mar 2001 08:04:21 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15016.36485.390431.9980@guru.mired.org> Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 02:04:21 -0600 To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Renaming standard-supfile? X-Mailer: VM 6.89 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I suspect this has been gone over before, but can't find anything in the lists that seem relevant. People using "standard-supfile" because it's the "standard" and getting -current seem to show up on a regular basis. I can see why it might have had that name before, but the name seems problematic now. Is there any point in petitioning to get it changed to something that doesn't induce errors? Given that we've got stable-supfile, "current-supfile" seems like an obvious choice. It would certainly solve the problem. Thanx, http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message