Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2000 11:13:09 -0500 From: Peter Radcliffe <pir@pir.net> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4.4 BSD forever? Message-ID: <20000108111309.A27724@pir.net> In-Reply-To: <3876D48E.8046C35@wcnet.net>; from jestess@wcnet.net on Sat, Jan 08, 2000 at 12:09:18AM -0600 References: <010501bf5989$2c4b7ec0$0200000a@danco.home> <3876D48E.8046C35@wcnet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Estess <jestess@wcnet.net> probably said: > But what does the version number really mean? Very little. In a world > where 3.1 precedes to 95 (MS), where 4 precedes 7 (Slackware), where > original releases start with 5 or 6 (Mandrake and Suse, I believe - > DQM), what do you think release numbers signify? Not much. I'm glad > FreeBSD has the integrity to sequence their releases in a logical > manner, but this isn't required, is somewhat unexpected, and is really > boring. Just because other people do silly things with version numbers, doesn't mean FreeBSD has to. Logical version numbers that are easy to compare are a _good_ thing. > Besides, wouldn't Kirk M. and the other BSD grandpops just *%^& if their > baby never made it past 4.4? Tribute or torture? Who knows? It's just a number, you know ... P. -- pir pir@pir.net pir@net.tufts.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000108111309.A27724>