From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Aug  2 13:19:37 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9648F16A4CE; Mon,  2 Aug 2004 13:19:37 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from fillmore.dyndns.org (port-212-202-50-15.dynamic.qsc.de
	[212.202.50.15])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 47DAD43D3F; Mon,  2 Aug 2004 13:19:37 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com)
Received: from dhcp-11.local ([172.16.0.11])
	by fillmore.dyndns.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168)
	(Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD))
	id 1BrciY-000G9R-UC; Mon, 02 Aug 2004 15:19:09 +0200
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 15:20:27 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482)
To: Jon Noack <noackjr@alumni.rice.edu>
From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>
In-Reply-To: <410E3AA2.4030800@alumni.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <B87C9CC5-E486-11D8-9C56-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9
cc: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org>
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: upgrade of file(1) to 4.10 (including FreeBSD elf(5) fixes)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:19:37 -0000

Jon Noack wrote:

> [...]
> Note that 5.x is hardcoded as -CURRENT.  This is asking to be fixed in 
> a few months when 5.x goes -STABLE and 6.x appears.  Better not to 
> print branch names at all (for dev branches I just print the whole 
> version value in parentheses).  There are other minor nits like 5.0.4 
> and 4.15.30...

Yes, you are right. At the time I've submitted the patch the point where 
FreeBSD would go -STABLE wasn't known, and the branch names are inspired 
by the output of uname(1). Anyway, this is a virgin import, and we 
shouldn't patch the sources. I'm sure the 4.11 upgrade will be trivial 
when we've done the 4.10 upgrade, and usually Christos is pretty 
responsive. We can do an follow-up patch to 4.10 that we can discuss 
here before submitting it upstream.

-Oliver