From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Jun 26 15:31:24 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from vivaldi.pn.npi.msu.ru (gw.pn.npi.msu.ru [193.232.127.202]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E70437B814 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 15:31:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from svysh@pn.sinp.msu.ru) Received: from handel.pn.sinp.msu.ru (handel [195.208.223.24]) (authenticated) by vivaldi.pn.npi.msu.ru (8.11.0.Beta3/8.11.0.Beta3) with ESMTP id e5QMV9W07627 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 02:31:10 +0400 (MSD) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.0.20000627022543.00ab0cc0@vivaldi> X-Sender: svysh@vivaldi (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 02:34:04 +0400 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org From: Sergei Vyshenski Subject: Re: FreeBSD 3.5 now available for x86 In-Reply-To: <890.961896181@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG So FreeBSD has two stable branches? Which one is more stable among stable for i386? Say for use at a site that need reliable round-the-clock gatewaing, named and mail operation? Thanks in advance for any comment. Sergei At 18:23 24.06.00 -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: >I'm pleased to announce the availability of FreeBSD 3.5-RELEASE, the very >LAST in 3.x-STABLE branch technology. Following the release of FreeBSD 3.4 >in December, 1999, many bugs were fixed, important security issues dealt >with, and even a few new features added. Please see the release notes >for more information. > >This release will only be done for the i386 architecture. If you >want to run FreeBSD on the Alpha architecture, please install >4.0-RELEASE - it's much better suited for that platform. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message