Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 00:32:48 -0800 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.ORG> To: "E.S." <bsdterm@HotPOP.com> Cc: Kent Stewart <kstewart@owt.com>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: make buildkernel says device atapicam is unknown!!?? Message-ID: <20021114083247.GH18778@vectors.cx> In-Reply-To: <200211140219.11408.bsdterm@HotPOP.com> References: <200211132359.26336.bsdterm@HotPOP.com> <200211140144.18808.bsdterm@HotPOP.com> <3DD3577B.5010501@owt.com> <200211140219.11408.bsdterm@HotPOP.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >> (11.14.2002 @ 0019 PST): E.S. said, in 4.8K: << > I've considered it, but isn't -STABLE a bit less stable than -RELEASE, since > the source in it is newer? >> end of "Re: make buildkernel says device atapicam is unknown!!??" from E.S. << - -RELEASE is just a snapshot of -STABLE at a specific point in time. In general, -STABLE is supposed to remain stable enough to be a -RELEASE at nearly any given point in time. Theoretically. Sortof. I have *never* had -STABLE not boot up for me, or cause the massive experimental problems that one might associate with -CURRENT. /Adam - -- Adam Weinberger adam@vectors.cx adamw@FreeBSD.ORG -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE901+vo8KM2ULHQ/0RAqzxAKDEKa6dFXiSROZo/2A2VSgJNVap5gCfVwxh TuK0PF7SaZheEKxQlBwMmf4= =qaSQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021114083247.GH18778>