Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:54:52 +0100 From: Roland Smith <rsmith@xs4all.nl> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Using RELENG_8 to compile for older RELENG_x Message-ID: <20091216115452.GA1888@slackbox.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <20091216105546.GG14175@lonesome.com> References: <d2e731a10912160115v76d413e1kcf2968886134183e@mail.gmail.com> <20091216102850.GA99834@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <20091216105546.GG14175@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--HcAYCG3uE/tztfnV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 04:55:46AM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:28:51AM +0100, Roland Smith wrote: > > the current ports tree isn't guaranteed to work on [4.x] either. >=20 > s/isn't guaranteed to/is guaranteed not to/ That's what I thought, but I couldn't quickly locate a reference to that event. I seem to recall a mailing list message to that event, but as I was already running a later version it didn't quite register. In the days before 5.3 or even 6.0 I could understand why people clung to 4.x. But now it seems like inviting trouble. Roland --=20 R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) --HcAYCG3uE/tztfnV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAksoyowACgkQEnfvsMMhpyWLbQCgkCA12L0FqkUh5lx9yTtwmcbF SiwAn0xUkiiDqzFGAzWeQajsp+Eg7/CS =2EU6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HcAYCG3uE/tztfnV--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091216115452.GA1888>