On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Feico Dillema wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 01:30:11PM -0600, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> > On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Julio Merino wrote:
> >
> > > No. -- AFAIK, the 1.6 branch should incorporate security updates and
> > > bugfixes, so that you could keep a stable system with secure and stable
> > > packages. If it is not beeing done, I do not know the reason :p
> >
> > It's pretty difficult to translate from pre-buildlink2 to
> > post-buildlink2, which is why I myself have stopped requesting
> > pull-ups. For my own desktops, I rebuilt everything against the branch
> > a couple of months ago, and now track current. The packages themselves
> > haven't gone through much churn (as the build system has), so it's
> > easy to update one or two at a time from the current pkgsrc.
> Maybe then a post-buildlink2 NetBSD-1.6 tag (NetBSD-1-6-B2?), which
> would be easier to maintain, would be an idea? I like the idea of a
> stable (and secure) pkgsrc branch for at least the latest NetBSD
> release.

What would be the point? It would be just what is in current now. :-)

Frederick