From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sun Apr 4 09:45:10 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EBE65D1950 for ; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 09:45:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FCpmj4vXFz4jjv for ; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 09:45:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id 1349iuuV095334; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 02:44:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id 1349iuM6095333; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 02:44:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <202104040944.1349iuM6095333@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 13.0-RC5 Now Available In-Reply-To: <29b600ee-2db2-d1d2-4171-903418c98749@blastwave.org> To: Dennis Clarke Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2021 02:44:56 -0700 (PDT) CC: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4FCpmj4vXFz4jjv X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net has no SPF policy when checking 69.59.192.140) smtp.mailfrom=freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.10 / 15.00]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[dnsmgr.net]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[69.59.192.140:from]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[69.59.192.140:from:127.0.2.255]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:13868, ipnet:69.59.192.0/19, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-current]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:45:10 -0000 > On 4/3/21 3:34 PM, Glen Barber wrote: > > The fifth RC build of the 13.0-RELEASE release cycle is now available. > > > > Beautiful. If we see RC8 then that is fine. Testing is a wonderful > process and I feel far better about a well tested release than an > instant "oops" with 13.1 kicked out a week later. BUT this is not more testing for the sake of good testing, this is purely incidental testing because of regressions in the product. This is, IMHO, the worst kind of testing. > > Also, I really am waiting to see the ten year old bug 159356 laid > to rest : > > [zfs] [patch] ZFS NAME_ERR_DISKLIKE check is Solaris-specific > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=159356 > > Sort of a thorn in my side for years. Regardless, release candidates > are a "good thing"(tm). Not really, they indicate a lack of Quality Assurance and Control, and without those principles you can test tell your blue in the face and never actually get anyplace. There is a premise in the product quality assurance sector, "You cannot test in quality". > > -- > Dennis Clarke > RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC > UNIX and Linux spoken > GreyBeard and suspenders optional -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org