Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 08:39:59 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Fumerola <billf@chc-chimes.com> To: mwlucas@exceptionet.com Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -stable too early? (was re: Kernel panic with recent RELENG_3) Message-ID: <Pine.HPP.3.96.990203083712.27586A-100000@hp9000.chc-chimes.com> In-Reply-To: <199902031447.JAA03089@easeway.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 3 Feb 1999 mwlucas@exceptionet.com wrote: > I won't consider 3.0-stable to be as reliable as 2.2.-stable until I see a > similar notice. > > The -stable tag isn't a guarantee of reliability. It's equivalent to the > developers saying, "We won't *deliberately* destroy your system." It's important to note the difference between 3.0-STABLE and 4.0-CURRENT is really only just a bunch of VM/-Wfoo fixes by dillon and co. - bill fumerola - billf@chc-chimes.com - BF1560 - computer horizons corp - - ph:(800) 252-2421 - bfumerol@computerhorizons.com - billf@FreeBSD.org - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.HPP.3.96.990203083712.27586A-100000>