Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 16:43:29 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> To: "David Knapp" <dknapp@luciamar.k12.ca.us> Cc: <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Stability concerns in latest -STABLEs. Message-ID: <000001be98e3$68b4cc70$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to> In-Reply-To: <37337A30.2DF8756@luciamar.k12.ca.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Theoretically, STABLE should be better, since it will have bugs fixed after the release. In reality, though, it doesn't always work that way. DS > I'm a newbie, so maybe I don't understand, but why not go with 3.1 > RELEASE? Shouldn't it be more stable or as stable as 3.1-STABLE? > > dbk 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?000001be98e3$68b4cc70$021d85d1>