On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 09:11:00PM +0000, Anonymous wrote:
> Theo de Raadt:
> > cho...@jtan.com wrote:
> >
> >> Anonymous writes:
> >>> Otto Moerbeek:
> >>>> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 03:13:00PM +0000, Anonymous wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Here too: https://www.openbsd.org/65.html
> >>>>
> >>>> Does it matter? It is very common for publications to be dated in the
> >>>> future.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Otto
> >>>
> >>> No, it's not common, neither for software releases nor for texts
> >>> published online (blogposts, fiction, etc). Maybe you're talking about
> >>> some niche. And yes, it matters because it's confusing: I opened the
> >>> front page soon after the release but was in doubt whether it's for real
> >>> because of the date.
> >>
> >> Well I'm not an author, editor, publisher or printer but I'm fairly sure
> >> nobody's ever gone from "I'm going to write a book" to "this book has been
> >> printed and is already on the shelves" in less than 24 hours, so
> >> publishing "in advance" like this makes total sense.
> >>
> >> A bit weird but luckily I'm not a complete fucking moron so I'm able to
> >> work out that when something says "released* on [future date]" that time
> >> travel was not invented while I wasn't looking and that a week here or
> >> there just doesn't matter.
> >>
> >> People pointing out spelling mistakes have more utility than this thread.
> >
> > Looking closer, the release directory contains root.mail which is dated
> > May 1. That file is also contained in the base set for each
> > architecture, which is hashed and signed. Sometimes tar'd, hashed, and
> > signed. There are also many binaries and files throughout the release
> > which aren't date May 1. It is a pretty unkempt state of affairs.
> >
> > Obviously to repair some of these issues, we should change the date in
> > that file (and some other files also) and re-roll all the release
> > builds. Starting now. Which will take some time. Sadly, those
> > repaired files will miss May 1, which is sure to elicit new complaints.
> >
> > Ironic isn't it? Just-in-time is difficult in the real world.
> >
> > I suggest the OP learns to let it go. Or visiting a clinic for some
> > therapy, in most countries this is government subsidized.
> >
> > The observant among you will have noticed that most errata+syspatch go
> > out a day early also. We've got a good justification for that though --
> > we are pandering to folk on the early side of the dateline. You can
> > conclude the 6.5 release was made available on-time, as we are pandering
> > to people on the early side of the weekline. I'll probably pander to
> > someone else for the 6.6 release.
> >
> > I'm late, I'm late! For a very important date! No time to say `hello,
> > goodbye,' I'm late, I'm late, I'm late!
> The reason for concern is that if the date is wrong then the
> infrastructure used to roll out the release has a bug which can have
> whatever consequences so rushing to download is unwise. But yes, I see
> that nothing has changed since the 70s, same moronic attitude towards
> people confused by Unix shit. At least you are funny morons, I give you
> that:)
>
We have better mechanisms to check a release than a date on a website.
Maybe we should wait next time until the release date? Would give me
the time to catch up on reading my National Geographic May issue.
-Otto
