> If config.new is the prefered kernel configurator, and config is
> "being phased out", is there any reason not to rename config to
> config.old and config.new to config?

On a port which has been switched over to config.new, no, unless you
care about compatability.  On a port which hasn't, yes, unless you like
typing "config.old" all the time.

Or such is my understanding: that you cannot use config.new on a kernel
designed to be configured with config, and vice versa.  If I'm wrong,
I'm sure someone who does know the truth will cheerfully correct me!

If this is so, then, config is "being phased out" only in the sense
that more and more ports are being converted to config.new, and new
ports should probably use it.

					der Mouse

			    mouse@collatz.mcrcim.mcgill.edu