From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 28 17:12:01 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A06E216A498; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:12:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (vc4-2-0-87.dsl.netrack.net [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B05443D64; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:11:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id jASH9oM4010299; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:09:50 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:10:08 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <20051128.101008.73745427.imp@bsdimp.com> To: jhb@freebsd.org From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <200511280853.35658.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20051127230109.GB73919@ip.net.ua> <20051127.163830.43671826.imp@bsdimp.com> <200511280853.35658.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0 (harmony.bsdimp.com [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:09:50 -0700 (MST) Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, ru@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/config configvers.h mkmakefile.c src/sys/conf Makefile.alpha Makefile.amd64 Makefile.arm Makefile.i386 Makefile.ia64 Makefile.pc98 Makefile.powerpc Makefile.sparc64 files files.alpha files.amd64 files.i386 ... X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:12:02 -0000 In message: <200511280853.35658.jhb@freebsd.org> John Baldwin writes: : On Sunday 27 November 2005 06:38 pm, M. Warner Losh wrote: : > How does this look to you? : : What is the point of the minor version number then if it is never checked? I : think we just should not do bumps for changes to config that allow old files : to still work. IOW, the most recent bump should simply be reverted. In : practice I don't think many folks other than developers ever end up with a : config that is out of date with the kernel sources. The minor numbers are checked. The idea is that if the kernel says you need X.Y to build it, then the config binary must be version X.Z, where Z >= Y. That's what my patch implements. Upon sober reflection, to answer Ruslan's issue, I think that the 100's thing might be a bad idea after all. I'll update my patch. Warner