Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:49:54 +0200
From:      Alessandro de Manzano <adm@unixmania.net>
To:        Otterr <otterr@telocity.com>
Cc:        stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: status of ATA subsystem
Message-ID:  <20020402184954.A32255@libero.sunshine.ale>
In-Reply-To: <001b01c1d9cf$658817c0$2800a8c0@dixiechicken.net>; from otterr@telocity.com on Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:48:51PM -0500
References:  <20020401223127.A28182@libero.sunshine.ale> <001b01c1d9cf$658817c0$2800a8c0@dixiechicken.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:48:51PM -0500, Otterr wrote:

> If stability is an issue, maybe you should look into RELENG_4_5 for only
> fixes since -RELEASE.
> -Otter

Yes, true, but I'm used to deploy -STABLE machines as my servers.
I upgrade them just one or two times max. between different -RELEASEs.

On some very critical machines I'm using RELENG_4_5, but on others no.
Also because often they have new / fixed interesting and useful
features.

IMHO ATA subsystem is so important that should always be as stable as
possibile in "-stable" (I'm not criticizing anyone!).

I hope these problems will be eventually fixed, before the not so far
away 4.6-release...


-- 

bye!

Ale


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?20020402184954.A32255>