Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 11:16:08 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bsd vs. linux and NT chart Message-ID: <36DDECE8.87906C49@newsguy.com> References: <99Mar2.114516est.113920@pandora.isinet.com> <4.1.19990302132445.040f6d40@localhost> <4.1.19990302184058.00c4a1c0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brett Glass wrote: > > If I upgrade machines to 3.1-RELEASE, I know I'll have major work > to do rewriting maintenance scripts, etc. because things like the utmp > format have changed. This means downtime for the client. Also, since > 3.0-RELEASE was explicitly NOT for production machines, the earliest > version I will install on ANY production machine will be 3.2-RELEASE > (and only then with special permission from the client, because our > general policy is to wait for the third "real" release of anything > before relying on it for mission-critical functions). > > Sorry to sound so utterly conservative, but that's 'cause we are. If so, why do you insist on having the latest release of whatever there is in the ports? -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org "FreeBSD is Yoda, Linux is Luke Skywalker." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36DDECE8.87906C49>