Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 15:19:49 -0400 (AST) From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> To: Michael Sierchio <kudzu@tenebras.com> Cc: kalts@estpak.ee, David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "leak" in softupdates? Message-ID: <20030307151723.L18433@hub.org> In-Reply-To: <3E68B9B3.9030509@tenebras.com> References: <20030305204526.T38115@hub.org> <20030307090033.GA61037@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <20030307101718.GA1908@kevad.internal> <3E68B9B3.9030509@tenebras.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Michael Sierchio wrote: > Vallo Kallaste wrote: > > > He has rather unusual requirements compared to a lot of others. As I > > understand he runs hundreds of jails and has thousands of processes, > > putting real challenge to VM. All this means that FreeBSD > > isn't ready to enterprise yet .... > > What a mind-blowingly stupid thing to say. If the concern is > with stability and performance, one would track -SECURITY and > not -STABLE. Actually, I've tried -SECURITY ... my servers crashed more often :) And have you ever tried to get someone to investigate/fix something that is considered a 'dead line'? The thing with -SECURITY is that its exactly that ... no bug fixes go into it, only critical security stuff ... so, if I were to report a bug on -SECURITY, it would most likely get ignored, since there is a very good chance that its already fixed in -STABLE, but nobody is going to back-patch it ... 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?20030307151723.L18433>