From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org  Sun Jul 12 06:44:27 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03904999753
 for <freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Sun, 12 Jul 2015 06:44:27 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp)
Received: from dec.sakura.ne.jp (dec.sakura.ne.jp [210.188.226.8])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B488E1F48
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 06:44:26 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp)
Received: from fortune.joker.local (180-198-137-134.nagoya1.commufa.jp
 [180.198.137.134]) (authenticated bits=0)
 by dec.sakura.ne.jp (8.14.3/8.14.2/[SAKURA-WEB]/20080708) with ESMTP id
 t6C6iGjF089652
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:44:17 +0900 (JST)
 (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp)
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:44:16 +0900
From: Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp>
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Will 10.2 also ship with a very stale NTP?
Message-Id: <20150712154416.b9f3713893fe28bfab1dd4d7@dec.sakura.ne.jp>
In-Reply-To: <20150712050443.GA22240@server.rulingia.com>
References: <20150710235810.GA76134@rwpc16.gfn.riverwillow.net.au>
 <20150712032256.GB19305@satori.lan>
 <20150712050443.GA22240@server.rulingia.com>
Organization: Junchoon corps
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.3 (GTK+ 2.24.27; amd64-portbld-freebsd10.2)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 06:44:27 -0000

As I already mentioned in another post, head has 4.2.8 p3 in-tree.

So the answer should be MFC before creation of releng/10.2 is planned
or not.


On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:04:43 +1000
Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com> wrote:

> On 2015-Jul-11 23:22:56 -0400, Chris Nehren <cnehren+freebsd-stable@pobox.com> wrote:
> >On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 09:58:11 +1000, John Marshall wrote:
> >> It's me again with my annual NTP whinge.
> >
> >The answer to the perennial "will release $foo ship with old / insecure
> >/ otherwise deficient $bar?" is still "install $bar from ports".
> 
> That's a non-answer.  It just changes the question to "why bother to
> include $bar in base when I need to install the port anyway".
> 
> -- 
> Peter Jeremy


-- 
Tomoaki AOKI    junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp