From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Jan 8 21:42:17 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from wcn4.wcnet.net (mail.wcnet.net [216.88.248.234]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D41CB150E8 for ; Sat, 8 Jan 2000 21:42:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jestess@wcnet.net) Received: from wcnet.net [216.88.253.99] by wcn4.wcnet.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-5.05) id AFB51784029E; Sat, 08 Jan 2000 23:42:13 -0600 Message-ID: <38781F3C.66D343FF@wcnet.net> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2000 23:40:12 -0600 From: John Estess Organization: compulsive or none, depending on the day X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4.4 BSD forever? References: <20000109050640.4F4F8A80F@kendra.ne.mediaone.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Say FreeBSD 4.4 and then say BSD 4.4. Then say 4.4 and say 4.4. > What's the difference? But the difference between 4.4BSD and 4.4FreeBSD-Vegas (number 22 of the cities series) should be enough to clue people in. > The readers of -Stable are close enough to FreeBSD to assume a difference, > or presume FreeBSD 4.4 if no comparision is made, just as they know > -Stable is FreeBSD-Stable@FreeBSD.org. Many others, further from > the world of FreeBSD, will know only enough to be confused. There is a community you have to be in (geeks?) to know what FreeBSD is to begin with, so this probably wouldn't be a problem. Also, if the user buys the 4 CD set, they can read the part about "FreeBSD is based on Berkeley 4.4 BSD...". If they can install from FTP, they probably know the difference. > Go ahead, treat the numbering as something for "those in the know" > to be the only ones who can get it right. And what exactly does it mean to somebody not in the know, even if they are labeled sequentially? Did 4.3BSD Reno confuse anyone? How about 4.3 Tahoe? I don't think so. The people who wanted Unix knew what they wanted. I can take Jordan's argument that a logical sequencing system is going to be used (boring), but I refuse to accept an argument that assumes stupid Unix users. As a general rule (which has been bent at times - sometimes by myself), that assumption is oxymoronic. -- _/ _/_/_/ || John Estess _/ _/ _/_/ || jestess@wcnet.net _/_/_/ _/_/_/ || To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message