Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 19:25:40 -0500 From: Jud <judmarc@fastmail.fm> To: "Jerry McAllister" <jerrymc@clunix.cl.msu.edu>, TM4526@aol.com Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: difference between releases Message-ID: <opsg58s21m0cf2rk@sparky> In-Reply-To: <200411082329.iA8NTi808870@clunix.cl.msu.edu> References: <200411082329.iA8NTi808870@clunix.cl.msu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 18:29:43 -0500 (EST), Jerry McAllister <jerrymc@clunix.cl.msu.edu> wrote: [snip] >> My only point was that a "Release" should not be "just another >> snapshot", there >> should be some "plan". [snip] > It is more than just another snapshot. It is a special snapshot that > has things frozen and tested in place to make sure they all work together > at that level - sort of a barrier condition. Daily snapshots do not have > that barrier condition, but are merely a dump of the source files as they > are at the moment. [snip] The 5.3-RELEASE announcement contains several links that provide good information regarding its features and bugs, such as both are known after an extended period of real-world testing. See <URL: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.3R/relnotes.html>; and <URL: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.3R/errata.html>. With this and other available information (e.g., mailing list discussions over the weeks of testing, and the source code itself for those capable and interested), users are free to decide for themselves which if any version of FreeBSD they wish to run. As a desktop user responsible only to myself, I have found -CURRENT to be more than sufficiently stable for my needs. If I ran a server and were responsible to others, I might decide that the most recent 4.x version, 5.3-RELEASE, or the 5.3-plus-security-and-other-critical-fixes branch fit my needs better. Jud
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?opsg58s21m0cf2rk>