From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Oct 24 18:49:39 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA04333 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 18:49:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from server.local.sunyit.edu (A-T34.rh.sunyit.edu [150.156.210.241]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04317 for ; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 18:49:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from perlsta@cs.sunyit.edu) Received: from localhost (perlsta@localhost) by server.local.sunyit.edu (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA06304; Fri, 24 Oct 1997 21:54:11 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: server.local.sunyit.edu: perlsta owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 21:54:11 -0500 (EST) From: Alfred Perlstein X-Sender: perlsta@server.local.sunyit.edu To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: why is freebsd distributed like this? In-Reply-To: <24971.877729659@time.cdrom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I understand most of the FreeBSD release system, however i have a problem with it that i feel should be addressed. Why are there releases floating around with security holes in them? certain 'fixes' that are trivial but nessesary like the procfs patch should be applied all around the source tree as soon as possible. I understand that that is what the -stable releases are for... but it's almost being too much of a purist to let that stuff continue to be in freebsd. .________________________________________________________________________ __ _ |Alfred Perlstein - Programming & SysAdmin --"Have you seen my FreeBSD tatoo?" |perlsta@sunyit.edu --"who was that masked admin?" |http://www.cs.sunyit.edu/~perlsta : '