> > it's just that some people don't want others to have it.
> 
> This sounds suspiciously like an accusation, and at best is speculation.
> I don't recall anybody saying that they didn't want people to have this
> code.

I think Scott has access to NetBSD CVS access.  Hence, when he uses
	cvs update
to update his source tree at home, cvs does not delete and mangle
local patches he has applied to his source tree -- in fact it tries to
be really nice about merging diffs.


However, Jukka only has "sup" access to NetBSD source.  So whenever he
runs
	sup supfile
to fetch new sources, sup may mangle and delete the *critical* bounce
buffer patches he has in his source tree.


This is one of the primary reasons why OpenBSD distributes sources
using the "anoncvs" service instead of sup.  The ability to easily
retain local diffs is oh-so-tasty.



Now, when looked at this way, I'm not surprised that Jukka is
complaining, or that Scott has missed the point.