From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Nov 23 11:18:47 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from techpower.net (techpower.net [205.133.231.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03476152CA; Tue, 23 Nov 1999 11:18:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hometeam@techpower.net) Received: from localhost (hometeam@localhost) by techpower.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA08128; Tue, 23 Nov 1999 14:20:08 GMT (envelope-from hometeam@techpower.net) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 14:20:08 +0000 (GMT) From: hometeam To: Kris Kennaway Cc: Doug White , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: pppd (Re: speaking of 3.4... ) In-Reply-To: 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 I feel most of the time bug fixes are in newer releases...I like the stable branch it works well for me...I get souce updates nitely , once a month update the bins.....Maybe jumping up to 2.3.6 would be jumping the gun unless it was a major hole in the prior version . I just think 3.3 stable is no differant except for the version number. but pppd 2.3.10 is 5 versions away from us. maybe port it like named. On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, hometeam wrote: > > > I agree with Doug > > I would like to see more quality not quantity, and updates on prg..like > > pppd , We are at 2.3.5 and releases are at 2.3.10 . > > Well, I'm not gainsaying the fact that an update to pppd would be nice, > but do you need it? i.e. are there bugs in 2.3.5, or features in 2.3.10 > which you really need? > > An update is something I have on my plate here when I get my machine fully > back on the net, but I doubt it would be prudent to stuff it in just > before 3.4 anyway (2.3.5 seems to work pretty well). > > Kris > > ---- > Cthulhu for President! For when you're tired of choosing the _lesser_ of > two evils.. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message