From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Oct 6 04:30:35 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id EAA21717 for stable-outgoing; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 04:30:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable) Received: from bob.tri-lakes.net ([207.3.81.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA21712 for ; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 04:30:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cdillon@tri-lakes.net) Received: from [207.3.81.139] by bob.tri-lakes.net (NTMail 3.02.13) with ESMTP id qa291398 for ; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 06:30:44 -0500 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.1 [p0] on FreeBSD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 06:23:46 -0000 (GMT) From: Chris Dillon To: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Fwd: CVSup release identity Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On 06-Oct-97 Annelise Anderson wrote: > > >On Sun, 5 Oct 1997, Ted Spradley wrote: > >> >> > >uname -r >> > > >> > >which will result in the message: >> > > >> > >FreeBSD 2.2-STABLE-AB >> > > >> > >or >> > > >> > >FreeBSD 2.2-STABLE (0360) >> > >> > I think that this is a very good idea. I would delete the "-STABLE" >> > portion of the label. "FreeBSD 2.2 (0360)" conveys the same info, is >shorter >> > and eliminates some of the confusion. For the RELEASES, I would use >> > "FreeBSD 2.2.0", "FreeBSD 2.2.5", etc. >> >> I like this. If it's got three digits (e.g. 2.2.5), it's a release. >If it's >> got two digits plus the extra part, it's taken from an on-going branch, >and >> the extra part indicates when it was taken. That should help clear up >any >> confusion between branches and releases. > >But releases are also taken from ongoing branches. In any case, uname -r >on my machine now produces: > >2.2-STABLE-971004-19:45 PDT > >which is explicit in indicating the date and time at which cvsup began >downloading the sources. That seems more informative than a code that >has to be translated into a date. > > Annelise I have been following this debate since it started, and my own idea at the beginning of it was very similar to the above. A time stamp is about as fine-grained as you can get, and is not dependant on how either CTM or cvsup work. After all, this has been how we have been describing just how far along we are on the stable tree for a long time now. "And you cvsupped when? 19:45 10/4/97? Oh, thats just before I made those changes." --- Chris Dillon --- cdillon@tri-lakes.net --- Powered by FreeBSD, the best free OS on the planet ---- (http://www.freebsd.org)