From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Mar 2 15:19:11 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from srv1.thuntek.net (srv1.thuntek.net [206.206.98.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A0BB1505E for ; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 15:19:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dwilde1@thuntek.net) Received: from thuntek.net (abq-063.thuntek.net [207.66.52.63]) by srv1.thuntek.net (8.9.1/8.6.12TNT1.0) with ESMTP id QAA23998; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 16:18:36 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <36DC7F82.63C6820A@thuntek.net> Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 16:17:06 -0800 From: Don Wilde X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2.6-RELEASE i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Glass Cc: Brett Taylor , Bill Fumerola , Adam Turoff , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bsd vs. linux and NT chart References: <4.1.19990302132445.040f6d40@localhost> <4.1.19990302154522.03fb3730@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Brett Glass wrote: > > At 03:00 PM 3/2/99 -0700, Brett Taylor wrote: > > >There's a reason we now have 3.1-STABLE. The 2.2.* branch is dead and > >eventually (probably fairly quickly) ports will stop compiling correctly > >for the 2.2 branch even if they have the ports updates correctly > >installed. > > Sorry, but recent releases that are used in existing mission critical systems > are NOT "dead limbs" to be sawn off within only a couple of months of > release. I can see the Linuxoids ranting now: "See? The FreeBSD team doesn't > even provide ports for a release that's less than 6 months old! So much > for their 'great ports collection.' That's the kind of support you'll get if > you use FreeBSD." > > Sad to say, they'll have a point. Conservative users who lag behind a version > or two to ensure stability are the LAST people the FreeBSD team should want > to disenfranchise. ("The power to serve," remember?) The ports had BETTER keep > working for AT LEAST a year after release. To do anything less is to hurt > users and damage FreeBSD's reputation beyond repair. > > --Brett I __STRONGLY__ concur with this. I will scream to high heaven if major ports stop working on 2.2.8, unless it can be guaranteed that 3.1 is as stable and forgiving in all production situations. I am now installing 3.1 to test, so I'm sure I'll find out soon myself, but if I put a client machine up and it barfs I -- and FreeBSD -- are dead meat for that client. I know it's a lot of work to maintain three trees, especially when the compiler has gone ELF, but, please, even if you have to teach ME how to do it, do it!!! -- oooOOO O O O o * * * * * * o ___ _________ _________ _________ ___==__ V_=_=_DW ===--- Don Wilde dwilde1@thuntek.net [ = = ] /oo0000oo-oo--oo-ooo---ooo-ooo---ooo-ooo---ooo-oo---oo To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message