Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 05 Jan 1997 17:55:53 -0800
From:      "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
To:        KATO Takenori <kato@freefall.freebsd.org>
Cc:        CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-sys@freefall.freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/isa/bs bs.c bs_isa.c bs_pisa.c bsfunc.c bsfunc.h bshw.c bshw.h bshw.lst bshw_dma.c bshw_pdma.c bsvar.h ccbque.h dvcfg.h scsi_dvcfg.h 
Message-ID:  <11580.852515753@time.cdrom.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 04 Jan 1997 23:10:23 PST." <199701050710.XAA17552@freefall.freebsd.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> kato        97/01/04 23:10:22
> 
>   Modified:    sys/i386/isa/bs  bs.c bs_isa.c bs_pisa.c bsfunc.c bsfunc.h
>                         bshw.c bshw.h  bshw.lst bshw_dma.c bshw_pdma.c
>                         bsvar.h ccbque.h dvcfg.h  scsi_dvcfg.h
>   Log:
>   Undo RCS keyword change to keep the original `$NetBSD$'.

Maybe we finally want to do what we've been threatening to do for
years now and take all the $Id$, $NetBSD$, $OpenBSD$, $FooBSD$ and
$BarBSD$ crap out of our source tree?

I recognise the *potential* benefit of such expansion, but balanced
against the *clear and obvious annoyances* that they cause, I don't
think they're worth it at all.

					Jordan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?11580.852515753>