Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 1 May 99 12:20 +0100
From:      Justin Murdock <justin@csad.coventry.ac.uk>
To:        jim@blues.ghis.net
Cc:        questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD 3.2 to be given to attendees of USENIX Technical Conference
Message-ID:  <199905011120.MAA00169@mascarpone.coventry.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: Jim Mock's mail of Wed, 28 Apr 99 21:16 %2B1000
References:  <68533.925278695@zippy.cdrom.com> <199904281049.LAA25638@mascarpone.coventry.ac.uk> <19990428211600.A57484@blues.ghis.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 at 11:49:00 +0100, Justin Murdock wrote:
> > I don't want 2 releases a year, I want 1 release every time FreeBSD
> > is ready for a new release. Or does FreeBSD require 2 releases a
> > year to keep Walnut Creek happy?

> Go take a look at the releases page.. http://www.freebsd.org/releases/
> There are new releases 3 or 4 times a year.

Sorry, I was rememebring the old Walnut Creek subscription information,
which suggested twice a year. It currently claims about 3 times a year.

> > Will this install and work out of the box. (unlike 3.1)?

> I've got 3.1 running on a few different machines.. out of the box.  As
> far as I know, there haven't been very many instances of 3.1 not
> working out of the box or all hell would've been raised on the lists.

http://www.freebsd.org/releases/3.1R/errata.html

2 & 3 are `real' problems. Did anyone test this release before it
was printed?

also fbsdboot.exe doesn't.

> As I said, go take a look at the previous releases.. 4 in 1998, 5 in
> 1997.. we've had one so far this year, and June would be the time for
> the next following the past release schedule.

> > I don't want to take another credibility hit - have the high (as I
> > perceived them) production values of 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 been ditched in
> > an attempt to be as sexy as Linux?

> Nothing to do with being as sexy as Linux.

No? not encouraging people to get their hands dirty? - whilst I take
this to have been apologetic humour:

     "This will cause the kernel change information to be read in and
     used properly (and you just learned a little about the new 3-stage
     loader in the process, so the exercise wasn't a total loss).  "

but I'm not quite comfortable with the sentiment behind it.  I'd
rather not notice FreeBSD :)

The nice thing about free software is that you have the source if you
need to fix it. What I like about FreeBSD was that you never need to.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199905011120.MAA00169>