Hi Collin,

At 2025-12-29T23:40:11-0800, Collin Funk wrote:

It does say 1993, but it also has the following:

    .\"	@(#)sysctl.3	8.1.1 (2.11BSD GTE) 1/13/95
    .\"
    .TH SYSCTL 3 "January 13, 1995"

The first line being used by SCCS? That is an assumption since I have
never used it.

Yup, that's exactly what it is.

https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/utilities/what.html

To add precision to my earlier remarks, the "last" Berkeley CSRG release
appears to have been "4.4BSD Lite Release 2", dated May 1995.

https://gunkies.org/wiki/4.4BSD_Lite_Release_2

The "real work" was by then happening as BSDI, where every developer was
assured that their deeply principled avoidance of the viral GPL would
result in billionaire status for them all.  Winning!

quoted

I suggest the Linux man-pages project not attempt to track the
provenance or timeline of 2.11BSD features.  It's too much work.

And there is probably not much practical benefit, i.e., just some
(very few, probably) people interested in the history.

I number myself among those few, but without some sort of tool to keep
track of 2BSD + 2.11BSD patches on an _automated_ basis to monitor when
symbols appear and vanish from the source base, I think researching such
history is a poor use of Linux man-pages contributors' time.

Put differently, I would advocate _against_ Alex mandating that
contributors to "HISTORY" sections pin down just when a feature showed
up in 2BSD development specifically.  Without the aforementioned tool, I
think the problem is too hard.  The juice is not worth the squeeze.

If any 2BSD advocates feel slighted, we can always point out that this
project largely uses the GPL, and that they can't expect anything good
to come from sick, evil copyleftists anyway.  😈🤘

Surely they can console themselves by counting their money.

Regards,
Branden