From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Apr 28 4:16:17 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from blues.ghis.net (slwag2p22.ozemail.com.au [203.108.157.70]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81C7C15454 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 04:16:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jim@blues.ghis.net) Received: (from jim@localhost) by blues.ghis.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA57539; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 21:16:01 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 21:16:00 +1000 From: Jim Mock To: Justin Murdock Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 3.2 to be given to attendees of USENIX Technical Conference Message-ID: <19990428211600.A57484@blues.ghis.net> Reply-To: jim@blues.ghis.net References: <68533.925278695@zippy.cdrom.com> <199904281049.LAA25638@mascarpone.coventry.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: <199904281049.LAA25638@mascarpone.coventry.ac.uk> Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 at 11:49:00 +0100, Justin Murdock wrote: > > Berkeley, California (April 27, 1999) > > > USENIX is providing grants to the OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, and > > Debian Linux development projects, to support each of them in > > issuing new releases. These releases will be given free of charge > > to all 1999 Annual Conference technical session registrants. The > > 1999 Annual Conference takes place June 6-11, in Monterey, > > California. Programs for the tutorial and technical sessions, > > including the FREENIX track, and associated events are online. > > Please go to http://www.usenix.org/events/usenix99 > > Hmm, another FreeBSD produced to deadline :( > > I don't want 2 releases a year, I want 1 release every time FreeBSD > is ready for a new release. Or does FreeBSD require 2 releases a > year to keep Walnut Creek happy? Go take a look at the releases page.. http://www.freebsd.org/releases/ There are new releases 3 or 4 times a year. > Will this install and work out of the box. (unlike 3.1)? > I don't want to take another credibility hit - have the high (as I > perceived them) production values of 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 been ditched in > an attempt to be as sexy as Linux? I've got 3.1 running on a few different machines.. out of the box. As far as I know, there haven't been very many instances of 3.1 not working out of the box or all hell would've been raised on the lists. As I said, go take a look at the previous releases.. 4 in 1998, 5 in 1997.. we've had one so far this year, and June would be the time for the next following the past release schedule. Nothing to do with being as sexy as Linux. -- Jim Mock System Administrator jim@blues.ghis.net ,-._|\ FreeBSD work: Global Hosting Inet Svcs http://www.ghis.net/ / \ The personal: http://www.ghis.net/~jim/ \_,--._/ Power To The FreeBSD 'zine http://www.freebsdzine.org/ v Serve! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message