* Carlos A. M. dos Santos <unixma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> COMPAT_FREEBSD32 is an unfortunate choice. It can be easily
> interpreted as "compatible with FreeBSD 3.2".

That's no problem, since COMPAT_FREEBSD%d was already a misnomer. It
would have been a lot better if it were replaced by a numerical
definition:

options COMPAT_FREEBSD_MAJOR=7

-- 
 Ed Schouten <e...@80386.nl>
 WWW: http://80386.nl/

Attachment: pgprqtw6FzxZr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to