From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Dec  9 15:42:07 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C5516A4CE
	for <doc@FreeBSD.org>; Tue,  9 Dec 2003 15:42:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pittgoth.com (14.zlnp1.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.149.111])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB94143D61
	for <doc@FreeBSD.org>; Tue,  9 Dec 2003 15:41:27 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost ([192.168.0.5])
	by pittgoth.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id hB9NfQaJ016746;
	Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:41:26 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:41:25 -0500
From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org>
To: Lukas Ertl <l.ertl@univie.ac.at>
Message-Id: <20031209184125.085ba539.trhodes@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20031209205743.K602@korben.in.tern>
References: <20031209205743.K602@korben.in.tern>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.6claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.2)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: doc@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: arch/developer handbook: for 4.x oder 5.x?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Documentation project <freebsd-doc.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc>,
	<mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-doc@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc>,
	<mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 23:42:07 -0000

On Tue, 9 Dec 2003 20:59:50 +0100 (CET)
Lukas Ertl <l.ertl@univie.ac.at> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I just came around some sample code in the arch handbook that's not
> correct for 5.x and I wondered if I should send in a patch or are
> arch/developer handbooks considered to reflect 4.x behaviour?

Please, send a patch.  :)


-- 
Tom Rhodes