Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 19:31:52 -0400 (AST) From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> To: Michael Sierchio <kudzu@tenebras.com> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "leak" in softupdates? Message-ID: <20030308192912.I58710@localhost> In-Reply-To: <3E6A7ADB.8020600@tenebras.com> References: <20030305204526.T38115@hub.org> <20030307090033.GA61037@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <20030307101718.GA1908@kevad.internal> <3E68B9B3.9030509@tenebras.com> <xzpisuvp0vu.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <3E68E839.1080009@tenebras.com> <xzpd6l1pj23.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <3E6A7ADB.8020600@tenebras.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 8 Mar 2003, Michael Sierchio wrote: > Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > No, but I know for a fact that there are bugs in the 4.7 security > > branch that have been fixed in -STABLE. > > No argument on that point, but PRERELEASE versions have, in my > experience, tended to break things that previously worked. But > that's just since 2.2.2 or so. Its happened ... and I get the server rebooted onto kernel.old, put in a bug report, and try again when I see a commit message go through cvs-all that appears to pertain to the bug ... or someone provides me with a patch to try if I'm the only one experiencing it ... How do you think PRERELEASE gets tested? :) How do you think that -STABLE stays relatively stable? 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?20030308192912.I58710>