Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 03:32:08 +0100 From: Adrian Wontroba <aw1@stade.co.uk> To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: setting up daily builds Message-ID: <20020413033208.C93690@titus.hanley.stade.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <p05101507b8dd3090f679@[10.0.1.25]>; from brad.knowles@skynet.be on Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 02:48:00AM %2B0200 References: <20020411214456.0E68B3F2D@bast.unixathome.org> <3CB63991.7B33851F@mindspring.com> <3CB707CF.D6DEAA19@attbi.com> <3CB7734B.DEE9ED94@mindspring.com> <p05101507b8dd3090f679@[10.0.1.25]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 02:48:00AM +0200, Brad Knowles wrote: > > Or, to put it another way: "code does not rot: it takes an > > intentional modification to break working code". > Usually true, but not always. Y2k is a good example of an exception. If the mere passage of time within its design life stops code from working, it is broken. Code which had to be changed for Y2K was broken, either when it was produced, or when the decision was taken to prolong its life into the danger period. In some cases the sins of one programming generation were visited on the next. Y2K conversion of systems largely written in the early 1980s was no fun (8-( -- Adrian Wontroba To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020413033208.C93690>