From owner-freebsd-questions Sat May 13 20:21:15 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1F2537B871 for ; Sat, 13 May 2000 20:21:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA06384; Sat, 13 May 2000 22:20:58 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dan) Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 22:20:58 -0500 From: Dan Nelson To: Kenneth Wayne Culver Cc: Omachonu Ogali , Brennan W Stehling , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 5.0 already? Message-ID: <20000513222058.A5564@dan.emsphone.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.14i In-Reply-To: ; from "Kenneth Wayne Culver" on Sat May 13 14:35:34 GMT 2000 X-OS: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In the last episode (May 13), Kenneth Wayne Culver said: > 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. Actually, 4.0 is without a doubt FreeBSD's most stable point-0 release ever, and probably (definitely, wrt NFS) more stable than 3.4. I've been running 4.* on 4 production machines at work and have had only one crash in the last 6 months between them. As for the "sudden" jump to 5.0 for -current, the decision was made when 3.0 was created to not do any more multiple-point releases (like 2.2.8 or god forbid 2.1.7.1 :) anymore. When -current gets ready for release, the major version number gets bumped. Take a look at /usr/share/misc/bsd-family-tree, and watch the far-left-hand branch to see what I mean. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@emsphone.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message