From owner-freebsd-questions  Wed Apr 16 17:08:33 1997
Return-Path: <owner-questions>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA09065
          for questions-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:08:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gdi.uoregon.edu (gdi.uoregon.edu [128.223.170.30])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA09049
          for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost) by gdi.uoregon.edu (8.8.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA19836; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Doug White <dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu>
X-Sender: dwhite@localhost
Reply-To: Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu>
To: Jim Dutton <jimd@dutton4.it.siu.edu>
cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Newer versions of bsd...mk files anywhere?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970414102212.2201A-100000@dutton4.it.siu.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970416170656.12317J-100000@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 14 Apr 1997, Jim Dutton wrote:

> Ummm - why should I have to worry about the blinking bsd.port.mk files? If
> an OS is released with 6 year old files, then it is the OS releasers that
> should make sure that the appropriate files are included in the OS
> release.

1991? That must be wrong.  The earliest import of bsd.subdir.mk is in
1994, and that's the initial revision for 2.0-RELEASE!

Doug White                              | University of Oregon  
Internet:  dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu    | Residence Networking Assistant
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite    | Computer Science Major