From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Nov 16 20: 5:26 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3873937B401 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 20:05:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from kurush.osdn.org.ua (external.osdn.org.ua [212.40.34.156]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE90743E42 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 20:05:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from never@kurush.osdn.org.ua) Received: from kurush.osdn.org.ua (never@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kurush.osdn.org.ua (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gAH44mTP016487; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 06:04:48 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from never@kurush.osdn.org.ua) Received: (from never@localhost) by kurush.osdn.org.ua (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id gAH44ld7016486; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 06:04:47 +0200 (EET) Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 06:04:46 +0200 From: Alexandr Kovalenko To: "Marc G. Fournier" Cc: "Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P." , Lefteris Tsintjelis , Peter Hoskin , Hununu , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD: Server or Desktop OS? Message-ID: <20021117040446.GA15886@nevermind.kiev.ua> References: <006601c28ddf$604010f0$fa00a8c0@DaleCoportable> <20021116232242.S23359-100000@hub.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021116232242.S23359-100000@hub.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello, Marc G. Fournier! On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 11:28:30PM -0400, you wrote: > > > It sure is misleading. Why is it called -stable then? You would > > expect > > > to stand up to its name. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Lefteris Tsintjelis > > > > > > > It depends on your point of view. -CURRENT is noted as occasionally > > being broken to the point that it won't even build. The RELENG_4 > > branch (almost) always will. From a -CURRENT point of view, > > RELENG_4 is "stable." > > > > However, to someone looking from the other direction, I can see > > where it might be 'misleading.' Perhaps it should have been called > > "FUTURE" and "CURRENT", instead. But I'm not sure that any > > of the core team or committers would consider themselves 'prophets.' > > ;-) > > Occasional problems with -STABLE I've always expected ... I don't run a > typical server ... hell, I had a problem for awhile there where I was > hitting the edge of the KVM, causing it to crash ... but, I swear, > STABLE's stability has been going down, not improving ... to the point > where I had one machine running a Sept10th kernel that would run for a few > weeks in a stretch, but a newer kernel I'd be lucky to keep alive for > 24-48hrs ... http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/ -> "The Cutting Edge" -- NEVE-RIPE Ukrainian FreeBSD User Group http://uafug.org.ua/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message