Well, I felt that if you went through the trouble of creating a 'release'
then you should check to see what is important to upgrade and what is not.
The main thing is that a 'point' or minor release (e.g. v4.6.x.x not v4.x or
major releases (v4.0 vs v5.0), usually doesn't do a port/package sw
I think 4.6.1 should contain following kernel fixes:
1.
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=100548+0+archive/2002/freebsd-stable/20020630.freebsd-stable
2.
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=1982827+0+archive/2002/cvs-all/20020630.cvs-all
3.
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/ge
> > Sure - the newest security fixes go into the release as
> well, but why
> > not Matt's most recent bug fixes?
>
> Why not include OpenSSL 0.96d, ipfw2, gcc 3.1 and while we're at it
> everyone else's pet software? Where would you draw the line? IMO,
> 4.6.1 s/b a point patch release.
On July 08, 2002, Gavin Atkinson sent me the following:
> > Hello!
> > 2. Please check why /usr/share/examples/kld and /usr/share/examples/drivers
> >are empty (while been OK in CVS repositary) both in 4.6-RELEASE and
> >4.6-RELEASE-p1.
>
> From memory, /usr/share/examples/cvsup was also
On Sun, 7 Jul 2002 01:55:20 -0700
Murray Stokely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The release engineers, port managers, and security officer team are
> currently working on a conservative set of changes to merge to the
> RELENG_4_6 branch in preparation for a 4.6.1 release. This point
> release wi
