On 08/09/04 06:13, Edwin Groothuis wrote: > Please have a look at > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/freebsd-versions.html > , please have a look at /usr/include/sys/param.h and come back with > patches if you still have problems. > > This nonsense has gone on long enough. It will be better if you > explain where my thinking went wrong in a constructive way instaed > of this constant bickering like old women do. That way we all learn > something from it. Someone may have already answered this (I'm just coming off working 66 hours in the past 80, so I'm a *bit* out_of_it/verging_on_hallucinations/etc.), but I think the biggest potential issue is the hard-coding of -CURRENT and -STABLE. As these are moving targets, hard-coding them means continued maintenance of the FILE code is necessary with each new major release (even if it is required only once every couple years). A programmatic solution that needed little or no maintenance would be preferred. I sidestepped the issue by printing out the __FreeBSD_version string whenever I came across a development branch. This still says "Hey, I'm not (based on) a release!" but doesn't need further maintenance and just happens to provide a little extra informative as well. Thanks for working on FILE; I'm glad I'm not the only one who was tired of seeing "FreeBSD 5.0.2" with recent -CURRENT... JonReceived on Tue Aug 10 2004 - 00:04:39 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:05 UTC