Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 12:20:06 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: stupid question about stable and current :-) Message-ID: <20000224122005.Q21720@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0002241941080.21906-100000@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>; from jcm@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org on Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 07:46:07PM %2B0000 References: <20000224120123.K21720@fw.wintelcom.net> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0002241941080.21906-100000@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> [000224 12:15] wrote: > Are there major changes in where config files are located in 4.0? I > was just starting to get the hang of it. Nothing earth shattering, but things like /etc/make.conf now has a FreeBSD default in /etc/defaults/make.conf things like that. :) You should check out mergemaster. > Also, why do all these breakages occur? If most programs are designed > to be modular and/or use pipes, they should be 'black boxes' and the > internals should be irrelevant, correct? Also, if the program is > patched to work under current, does that mean it will *not* work under > stable anymore? Or is it the *kernel* and other system modules that are > patched, rather than the problem program itself? Generally a -current program will have less of a chance of working on an older system, where a older binary should almost always work on a -current system. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000224122005.Q21720>