Small motd nit in 10.1

[Warren Block]

On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 8:47:42 pm Paul Mather wrote:
>>
>> The potential confusion arises because freebsd-version agrees with
>> freebsd-update, but uname doesn't always.  If you track FreeBSD via
>> freebsd-update, uname only gets bumped when the kernel is updated. If
>> you want to know which version of FreeBSD you're running, which command
>> is more accurate: freebsd-version or uname -a?  I would argue the former
>> (freebsd-version).
>
> A fact I continue to bemoan. :(
>
>> If you track FreeBSD via source updates, freebsd-version and uname -a
>> match each other, so long as you update kernel and world together.
>>
>> Consider the system below, updated using freebsd-update after the last
>> advisory causing an update to 10.0-RELEASE:
>>
>> =====
>> % freebsd-version
>> 10.0-RELEASE-p11
>> % uname -a
>> FreeBSD chumby.dlib.vt.edu 10.0-RELEASE-p10 FreeBSD 10.0-RELEASE-p10 #0: Mon
> Oct 20 12:38:37 UTC 2014     root at amd64-
> builder.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC  i386
>> =====
>
> The problem, of course, is that if you are obtaining the version for a bug
> report or an e-mail to the lists, the latter output provides more details
> (e.g. architecture as Warren noted) even though it is stale due to
> implementation details of freebsd-update.

There is room on that line to show both:

   Show details of the FreeBSD installation:  uname -a ; freebsd-version

Or some combination like that.