From owner-freebsd-stable Tue May 25 10:31:24 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from paprika.michvhf.com (paprika.michvhf.com [209.57.60.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D8A8E14F05 for ; Tue, 25 May 1999 10:31:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from vev@michvhf.com) Received: (qmail 4324 invoked by uid 1001); 25 May 1999 17:31:23 -0000 Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 13:31:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Vince Vielhaber To: Wilko Bulte Cc: Seth , serge69@nym.alias.net, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Q] How stable is FreeBSD 3.X ? In-Reply-To: <199905251530.RAA15405@yedi.iaf.nl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 25 May 1999, Wilko Bulte wrote: > As Seth wrote ... > > > Why not upgrade to -STABLE and solve the problem? I also had panics under > > 3.1-RELEASE, but they were all fixed within one week of -STABLE upgrades. > > I agree this may fix it. But it does not address the original point of > Sergey: why should I need to go for V.next if I just got my V.today with > -RELEASE stamped on it? > > Mind you, there are more than enough answers to that question. One of the > major ones is the fact that FreeBSD is a volunteer effort. We don't have > paid people to test it on a gazillion different hardware platforms. > > If you think that is not relevant: I used to work with the SCO Unix source > base and the amount of comment on hardware quirks is considerable to say the > least. > > No instant answers I guess,. I'm leaving Sergey's original in place so everyone can reread it. From the vast amount of information he gives (and has given in subsequent followups) what alternate advice can anyone give him? 3.2-R happened ten days ago, so if he got V.today or even V.yesterday he'd be using 3.2. There is no mention to the hardware used or even what other software he's using. How about what he's doing when it fails? Is he by chance overclocking? Who knows? In another post he says it's up to the developers to ask him questions. If he doesn't want to volunteer the conditions surrounding the problems he's having with an OS that came out a few months ago, the only answer can be to upgrade to the current version. > > > On Tue, 25 May 1999, Sergey wrote: > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > I've checked this out on good hardware. And now can CLAIM that > > > 3.1-R *really* have kernel problems on FreeBSD's "classic" configuration. > > > This bug causes TERRIBLE instability - panic in 24 hours. Even Microsoft's > > > OSes gives significantly better results > > > > > > > > > > > > This is mourning day for me - I CAN'T believe in stability of RELEASES > > > any more... > > > > > > > > > With best regards, Sergey. Vince. -- ========================================================================== Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev@michvhf.com flame-mail: /dev/null # include TEAM-OS2 Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com ========================================================================== To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message