Subject: re: install/28400: latest change to use NetBSD logos in xdm was apparently not tested on 1.6.x
To: matthew green <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 11/26/2004 19:12:57
[ On Thursday, November 25, 2004 at 17:22:53 (+1100), matthew green wrote: ]
> Subject: re: install/28400
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 11:53:53AM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> > Synopsis: latest change to use NetBSD logos in xdm was apparently not tested on 1.6.x
> > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
> > State-Changed-By: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > State-Changed-When: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:18:37 +0000
> > State-Changed-Why:
> > xsrc on 1.6 has it's own branch and is maintained there. If you want to use
> > the -current xsrc that's fine, but there are no guarentees for it to work with
> > the branch "as-is". The branched xsrc for 1.6 does build fine.
> > hmm? xsrc has always supposed to be portable to the previous release.
> > the xsrc branches are for specific releases, and are not maintained
> > really beyond that.
> > i think this PR should be re-opened and fixed.
> This is a set list problem (from reading the original PR). That never gets
> maintained as -current set lists match -current. Changing distrib/... on
> the 1.6 branch to match anything except the 1.6 branched tree's is just
> oh i see. yeah, i agree. i was thinking xsrc could be changed to
> suit, but that's not really the case...
For what it's worth I agree too! ;-)
I had forgotten that xsrc was branched for the releases. I meant it to
be an "install" problem though -- not an xsrc one.
It would be nice though to see xsrc re-branched for each patch release
though, instead of dragging along ancient unmaintained xsrc code. That
would of course require updating the distrib/sets lists just as I've
been doing for my own local reelease builds.....
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP RoboHack <email@example.com>
Planix, Inc. <firstname.lastname@example.org> Secrets of the Weird <email@example.com>