From owner-freebsd-arch Mon May 1 13: 0:59 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2390037C1A1 for ; Mon, 1 May 2000 13:00:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA21179 for ; Mon, 1 May 2000 22:00:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id WAA14180 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Mon, 1 May 2000 22:00:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F366D37BFD5 for ; Mon, 1 May 2000 12:58:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA03608; Mon, 1 May 2000 13:00:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fetch(1) In-reply-to: Your message of "29 Apr 2000 14:50:55 +0200." Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 13:00:15 -0700 Message-ID: <3605.957211215@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > So, any arguments for or against importing it into -CURRENT? Yes, the fact that it's not fully compatible with the old. I'm sure you're eager to bring in a newer fetch(1), but you should still wait until it's a complete replacement before taking this important final step. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message