From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Apr  7 11:30:16 1997
Return-Path: <owner-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA00632
          for current-outgoing; Mon, 7 Apr 1997 11:30:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA00611
          for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Mon, 7 Apr 1997 11:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id LAA03227; Mon, 7 Apr 1997 11:29:52 -0700 (PDT)
To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch)
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org (FreeBSD Current Mailing List)
Subject: Re: CVSUP and Release Question 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 07 Apr 1997 18:21:08 +0200."
             <19970407182108.RO31161@jette.heep.sax.de> 
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 11:29:51 -0700
Message-ID: <3224.860437791@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> As Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> 
> > > I am using cvsup on tag=RELENG_2_2, but my build says 2.2-STABLE.
> > 
> > Joerg jumped the gun on calling it -stable, but now I don't want
> > to switch it back because there will end up being two sets of
> > people with "2.2-STABLE" in their uname line - the pre-stables and
> > the real-stables. :-)
> 
> So, this was the intended effect. :-)

Fine, so now you explain to all the current pre-stables that they're
really pre-stable and not quite so safe as their uname(1) output would
have them believe. :-)

					Jordan