At 7:36 PM +0100 12/6/04, Jose M Rodriguez wrote:
El Lunes, 6 de Diciembre de 2004 08:39, Rob escribi�:
Hi,
For 5.3 in /usr/share/examples/cvsup, there's:
stable-supfile : for FreeBSD-stable
standard-supfile : for FreeBSD-current
I find this naming rather confusing. Why "stable" refers to STABLE,
but "standard" refers to CURRENT ?
This causes unnecessary confusion. Why not the following name
convention:
release-supfile : for FreeBSD-RELEASE
Better security-supfile. There is just one release, things like
RELENG_5_3 are security branchs, not release branchs.
Let me add to the pain by noting that RELENG_5_3 is not a security
branch (the way we used to have security branches). It is now
called an "errata branch", and it may see some updates which are
not for security issues. Not many, and only "really really safe"
ones, but it is more than just security fixes...
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
