> They may sound like a stupid question, but why can't we just replace the
> netbsd11 file with code that actually works on more machines?  Is it just
> an organizational thing or is it a NetBSD policy to keep the distribution
> source as the default file?

Largely because the kernel would then be different than that which you
could compile from the 1.1 sources and that would be a Bad Thing
(although probably not a hugely Bad Thing).  We should have provided
patches and a kernel built from those patches, though.  As time
progressed, the kernel became out of sync with the 1.1 binaries enough
that some utilities would no longer function properly (as kernel data
structure change, program like ps stop working properly), so we really
don't want to start providing current kernels for 1.1 binaries and we
don't want to replace the 1.1 binaries with the current sets because
there would be no source tars available for precisely those sets and
-current is usually in a state of flux where more and more serious bugs
might exist.  Besides, 1.2 is almost out now and we're working toward
more frequent releases...

-allen

-- 
 Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com ** MacBSD == NetBSD/mac68k **
   Where does all my time go?  <a href="http://www.netbsd.org/">Guess.</a>