From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Apr 12 19:33: 8 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from blue.gradwell.net (blue.gradwell.net [195.149.39.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1C4F037B400 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 19:33:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 26835 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2002 02:33:02 -0000 Received: from public1-stok1-5-cust38.manc.broadband.ntl.com (HELO access2.hanley.stade.co.uk) (213.106.97.38) by pop3.gradwell.net with SMTP; 13 Apr 2002 02:33:02 -0000 Received: from titus.hanley.stade.co.uk (titus [192.168.1.5]) by access2.hanley.stade.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g3D2WZn69445 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2002 03:32:35 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from aw1@titus.hanley.stade.co.uk) Received: (from aw1@localhost) by titus.hanley.stade.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g3D2W8F96967 for chat@freebsd.org; Sat, 13 Apr 2002 03:32:08 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from aw1) Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 03:32:08 +0100 From: Adrian Wontroba To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: setting up daily builds Message-ID: <20020413033208.C93690@titus.hanley.stade.co.uk> Reply-To: aw1@stade.co.uk Mail-Followup-To: Adrian Wontroba , chat@freebsd.org References: <20020411214456.0E68B3F2D@bast.unixathome.org> <3CB63991.7B33851F@mindspring.com> <3CB707CF.D6DEAA19@attbi.com> <3CB7734B.DEE9ED94@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from brad.knowles@skynet.be on Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 02:48:00AM +0200 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE Organization: Yes, I need some of that. X-Phone: +(44) 1782 207338 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 02:48:00AM +0200, Brad Knowles wrote: > > Or, to put it another way: "code does not rot: it takes an > > intentional modification to break working code". > Usually true, but not always. Y2k is a good example of an exception. If the mere passage of time within its design life stops code from working, it is broken. Code which had to be changed for Y2K was broken, either when it was produced, or when the decision was taken to prolong its life into the danger period. In some cases the sins of one programming generation were visited on the next. Y2K conversion of systems largely written in the early 1980s was no fun (8-( -- Adrian Wontroba To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message