Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 09:19:56 +0100 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: cpet <cpet@sdf.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: why would I get a segmentation fault on one system but not the other? Message-ID: <20150222091956.fd1ec914.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <390c4c0547fc27e91d28872d29aa2e04@sdf.org> References: <20150221224006.GA5501@home.parts-unknown.org> <09da5ec0816e098badc49432c802dc18@sdf.org> <390c4c0547fc27e91d28872d29aa2e04@sdf.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 17:03:50 -0600, cpet wrote: > As well as don't use stable on a production box as STABLE doesn't mean > what it means. STABLE means that the API/ABI is stable. Unlike HEAD (CURRENT), STABLE still is actually _stable_ in most cases, so it's a valid solution for production systems (given that you're prepared well, and you know what you're doing). I'm running STABLE on few production machines myself (where this is needed), but I usually prefer (and often recommend) using RELEASE and add the security patches when they are available. STABLE does _not_ mean it's an experimental branch such as HEAD. In HEAD, you might experience the following things: (a) system doesn't even build (b) system builds, but crashes (c) system works perfectly fine In cases of (a) and (b), updating your sources a few hours later may turn the whole thing into case (c). Also note that a feature tested in HEAD _may_ disappear. HEAD is "filtered" to STABLE, and STABLE is "filtered" to RELEASE. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150222091956.fd1ec914.freebsd>