Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 23:46:50 +0200 (CEST) From: Wilko Bulte <wilko@yedi.iaf.nl> To: dcs@newsguy.com (Daniel C. Sobral) Cc: davids@webmaster.com, mike@smith.net.au, serge69@nym.alias.net, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Q] How stable is FreeBSD 3.X ? Message-ID: <199905252146.XAA05453@yedi.iaf.nl> In-Reply-To: <374AF82C.2ED50D57@newsguy.com> from "Daniel C. Sobral" at "May 26, 1999 4:21:16 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Daniel C. Sobral wrote ... > David Schwartz wrote: > first, and only *then*, if the bug persists, complain. What's the > point of complaining about something fixed already? And if it is not > fixed, how are we supposed to tell the difference between it, and > something that *has* been fixed, if you are not using the latest > stable? > > And don't come with the "company supported" stuff. Default procedure > for technical support of any software house is to first get the user > to apply fixes, and only then consider the possibility of new bug. There is one detail I miss: most commercial products are supported by supplying limited scale fixes (OK, sometime a *lot* of them) instead of a wholesale upgrade. Not that I advocate starting a patch circus like most of the commercial folks mind you! Just an observation. | / o / / _ Arnhem, The Netherlands - Powered by FreeBSD - |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte WWW : http://www.tcja.nl http://www.freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199905252146.XAA05453>