Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 13:51:13 +0200 (MET DST) From: roberto@blaise.ibp.fr (Ollivier Robert) To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bogus release version string Message-ID: <199506191151.NAA18754@blaise.ibp.fr> In-Reply-To: <199506191036.UAA30605@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Jun 19, 95 08:36:03 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Release: FreeBSD 2.0-BUILT-19950603 i386 > > 1. This provides very little information about the version - it might be > for plain 2.0 built late or for 2.2 built early. > > 2. The current version isn't 2.0 or 2.1, it's pre-2.2. I don't think putting the _build_ date in the version is a good idea. I rather liked the 2.1-Development one. Build date is in the rest of uname output so why duplicate it ? Especially when the build date has nothing to do with the sources dates... Better to put 2.2-Development there IMO. -- Ollivier ROBERT -=- The daemon is FREE! -=- roberto@FreeBSD.ORG FreeBSD keltia 2.0-BUILT-19950503 #3: Wed May 3 19:53:04 MET DST 1995
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199506191151.NAA18754>