From owner-freebsd-current  Tue Jan  9 02:28:50 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id CAA29382
          for current-outgoing; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 02:28:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA29375
          for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 02:28:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.7.3/8.6.9) id CAA29424; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 02:28:28 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 02:28:28 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199601091028.CAA29424@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: jkh@time.cdrom.com
CC: phk@critter.tfs.com, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de,
        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <23576.821102480@time.cdrom.com> (jkh@time.cdrom.com)
Subject: Re: Current is looking more stable these days..?
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

 * Not necessary - we're mostly just trying to test the base bits here
 * with the snapshots..  Once we get further along in 2.2's development
 * cycle, perhaps we can talk about updating ports! :)

Well, the ports tree is already operating under -current, so the tree
itself should be ok.  However, the massive number of missing packages
may going to cause the user some confusion.  Maybe you can add a
warning at the top of the package installation screen?

Satoshi