From owner-freebsd-java Wed Jul 10 20:32:22 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 103E137B400 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 20:32:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 573AD43E42 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 20:32:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nate@yogotech.com) Received: from emerger.yogotech.com (emerger.yogotech.com [206.127.123.131]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA28614; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 21:30:53 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate@yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by emerger.yogotech.com (8.12.5/8.12.3) id g6B3UqQB014069; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 21:30:52 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate) From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15660.64492.476148.832286@emerger.yogotech.com> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 21:30:52 -0600 To: Bill Huey Cc: Nate Williams , "Georg-W. Koltermann" , freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD OS version for HotSpot (was: 1.3.1 patchset 7 not quite ready) In-Reply-To: <20020710235822.GA3402@gnuppy.monkey.org> References: <59063B5B4D98D311BC0D0001FA7E452205FDA83A@l04.research.kpn.com> <20020710102904.GA3882@gnuppy.monkey.org> <1026333648.676.22.camel@hunter.muc.macsch.com> <20020710232517.GB2394@gnuppy.monkey.org> <15660.50045.80305.351508@emerger.yogotech.com> <20020710234416.GD2394@gnuppy.monkey.org> <15660.50999.28887.442198@emerger.yogotech.com> <20020710235822.GA3402@gnuppy.monkey.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.07 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > I believe Dan is going to do this, but until that happens, why not just > > leave the -stable support in place? It certainly isn't hurting > > anything. > > There's another subtle bug in -stable that isn't worth it for me to > track it down, which just gives me more reason to abandon -stable > since it won't run correctly on it anyways even with my hacks. It > directly includes a private pthreads header... > > I'd like to keep things clean by removing a lot of the sloppiness > in the current tree. What I commited was a snapshot of my development > tree and was in no way designed for general consumption and I don't > expect folks to clean up after me. > > If there's a compelling reason for me to keep -stable, then I'm open > to suggestions such as large body of folks that can only run -stable > because they have only 1 machine, etc... IMNSHO, -current is a free-for-all, and people who want to do Java development shouldn't be expected to play the -current games. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message