Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 14:35:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth Wayne Culver <culverk@wam.umd.edu> To: Omachonu Ogali <oogali@intranova.net> Cc: Brennan W Stehling <brennan@offwhite.net>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 5.0 already? Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0005131433150.121-100000@rac5.wam.umd.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10005130735370.20100-100000@hydrant.intranova.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alright, this is how it works. 3.x-STABLE is STILL the only TRUELY Stable tree. the x.0 releases are meant to be releases which iron some stuff out, and when the x.1 release comes out, that is when the tree becomes -STABLE. -Stable progresses along with bugfixes and minor added features from -CURRENT, and every so often a -RELEASE is taken as a snapshot from -STABLE and given a new version number. -Current takes on the next major revision number, but usually doesn't come out for a year to a year and a half. > > > How is FreeBSD moving along so quickly? One month I am running 3.0R and a > > few months later we are past 3.4 and on to 4.0 STABLE and finally we > > have 5.0 out there already before a 4.1 STABLE exists. > > I was told that the new numbering scheme was only x.0-RELEASE, x.0-STABLE, > so on and so forth, I'm yet to verify this. > > > I am confused. What is going on with all these branches? Is 5.0 the > > FreeBSD/BSDi merge? Is there a major technology leap with each version > > which demands such widely spread version numbers? > > As of my knowledge, no. > > > My flawed upgrade to 4.0 a while back left me feeling FreeBSD is going too > > fast and that stability and quality is suffering. A friend of mine was > > actually scared off and now prefers to go with Linux as it's development > > seems to be more conservative. > > What stability problems are you having with 4.0? > > > Why is FreeBSD going so fast? Could it be that the upcoming release of > > Mac OS X was based on mostly on 3.2 and that FreeBSD wants to appear to be > > years past that version? If so, is it? > > No, FreeBSD isn't doing a Slackware-type scheme. > > > Are we going to be running version 9.0 in less than 5 years? > > Possibly. I mean, do the differences between version numbers make a > difference to the operating system itself? If 4.0 was called 10.0, would > it matter that it has a new number? What if it was called 1.15? Version > numbers are just there for the purposes of keeping track of things, the > numbers themselves don't influence the software, and it's up to the > manafacturer of whatever software product to increment the version numbers > in any way they feel fit. > > -- > +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ > | Omachonu Ogali oogali@intranova.net | > | Intranova Networking Group http://tribune.intranova.net | > | PGP Key ID: 0xBFE60839 | > | PGP Fingerprint: C8 51 14 FD 2A 87 53 D1 E3 AA 12 12 01 93 BD 34 | > +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > 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?Pine.GSO.4.21.0005131433150.121-100000>