From owner-freebsd-newbies Wed Jun 28 1:56: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Received: from uranus.interscope.ro (ns.interscope.ro [193.226.188.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAA7937B7AD for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 01:56:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from KoronkaS@interscope.ro) Received: by URANUS with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:53:16 +0300 Message-ID: From: Stefan KORONKA To: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Cc: 'David Johnson' Subject: RE: RELEASE vs STABLE Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:53:11 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Is there any paticular pressing need to use -STABLE versus -RELEASE? I > followed the book last weekend and tried to upgrade from 4.0-STABLE to > 4.0-RELEASE, you mean from release to stable :) > and it cvsup'ed and built just fine. It would not install > however. There were several errors in creating links, trying > to install > non-existant files, etc. After about an hour trying get get it > installed, I gave up. > > At that time I figured it good enough to stick with -RELEASE. But now > I'm wondering if this is the proper attitude. So how important is > -STABLE? well, my (particular) opinion is that: if it works, why bother ?! If you use it for workstation (and I guess you do) and not for a real server, it will work just fine, and most probably you won't feel the difference. However, if your system crashed (and I never seen BSD crashed :), or you want to experiment, or you want to be up-to-date, you might may consider upgrade to stable. Stefan > > David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message