On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 05:45:59PM -0600, Nate Williams wrote:
I believe Dan is going to do this, but until that happens, why not just
leave the -stable support in place? It certainly isn't hurting
There's another subtle bug in -stable that isn't worth it for me to
track it down, which just gives me more reason to abandon -stable
since it won't run correctly on it anyways even with my hacks. It
directly includes a private pthreads header...
I'd like to keep things clean by removing a lot of the sloppiness
in the current tree. What I commited was a snapshot of my development
tree and was in no way designed for general consumption and I don't
expect folks to clean up after me.
If there's a compelling reason for me to keep -stable, then I'm open
to suggestions such as large body of folks that can only run -stable
because they have only 1 machine, etc...
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message