Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 19:39:27 +0900 From: Rob <spamrefuse@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: standard-supfile = stable-supfile with 5.3 ? Message-ID: <41909E5F.7020300@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20041109103151.40F326147@hoppel.local>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Björn König wrote: > Rob wrote: > > >>[...] >>both have >> >> *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5 >> >>although the first one claims to download CURRENT. >> >>And, eh, why is the filename "standard-supfile" and >>why not the more obvious "current-supfile" ? > > > It only claims, but it doesn't bring you -CURRENT. > That's the reason why it should not be renamed. > The standard-supfile contains the standard tag of your release > to keep it up to date. Maybe someone will change this sentence > in standard-supfile to 'This file contains all of the "CVSup > collections" that make up the FreeBSD-stable source tree.' soon. If so, then why do we have a standard-supfile and a stable-supfile doing the same thing? If both bring you -STABLE, one of the two seems to be redundant to me and having two sup files doing the same only causes confusion. R.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41909E5F.7020300>