From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jul 15 11:50:38 2003
Return-Path: <owner-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 3C50937B401
	for <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org>; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:50:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rootlabs.com (root.org [67.118.192.226])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0376843FBF
	for <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org>; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:50:36 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from nate@rootlabs.com)
Received: (qmail 20443 invoked by uid 1000); 15 Jul 2003 18:50:36 -0000
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:50:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>
To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20030715184729.GB76909@dragon.nuxi.com>
Message-ID: <20030715114903.T20428@root.org>
References: <20030707180618.GB75063@dragon.nuxi.com>
	<XFMail.20030707142119.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
	<20030715184729.GB76909@dragon.nuxi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: gordon@FreeBSD.org
cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc/mtree BSD.root.dist src/include paths.h
 src/rescue Makefile README src/rescue/librescue Makefile src/rescue/rescue
 Makefile
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 18:50:39 -0000

On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:21:19PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> > I don't commit every hack we use, but I don't
> > see a legitimate reason for blowing away /stand during installs.
> > Go ahead and be pig-headed if you want though.  If the consensus
> > is that /stand should go then I guess that will be Yet Another Local
> > Patch.
>
> If "/resuce" had been installed in "/stand" as would be the FreeBSD way
> since 2.0; we wouldn't be having this discussion.  Yet another reason why
> we should have gone with that location.

Is there any reason why we can't just change the /rescue stuff to install
in /stand after testing shows it works as a replacement for /stand?  This
would have to be done before 5.2 obviously.

-Nate