From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Nov 2 20:48:52 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from poseidon.cannoncreek.com (unknown [216.252.208.241]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A595337B4E5 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:48:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from nomad ([192.168.0.69]) by poseidon.cannoncreek.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA74668; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 12:45:33 +0800 (PHT) (envelope-from marsattack@cannoncreek.com) Message-ID: <00a701c04552$d5b7c800$4500a8c0@nomad> From: "Mars Attack" To: "Gregory Bond" Cc: References: <200011030353.OAA19660@lightning.itga.com.au> Subject: Re: 4.1.1-Stable Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 12:59:13 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > is there still a cvs repository (internat) that still has = > > 4.1.1-STABLE and not 4.2-BETA? 4.2Beta is still very buggy.. > > Any repository that has 4.2Beta will have 4.1.1-STABLE. And 4.1.1-Stable is a > name that refers to a continuing evolution of the product, not a single > version. > > And they are almost exactly the same code, so the Beta is no more buggy than > the later -Stable versions. Please do not distribute unfounded bias or rumour > as if it were fact. > sorry, folks if it cost you some time, i did not believe that: 4.2-BETA = 4.1.1-STABLE the name implies that its still in BETA stage and not STABLE as -STABLE is... i may have missed some things while upgrading to a later -Stable that's why it seemed buggy cheers... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message