Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 11:24:42 +0100 From: Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net> To: Dave Horsfall <dave@horsfall.org> Cc: FreeBSD STABLE list <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Is 4.10-BETA stable? Message-ID: <20040422102442.GU32710@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.4.58.0404221649040.8333@dave.horsfall.org> References: <Pine.BSI.4.58.0404221649040.8333@dave.horsfall.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--4T94Hejb80K+e1gX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 07:58:32PM +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote: > I decided to take the plunge and perform my very first upgrade, from 4.7 > to (I thought) 4.9, by CVSuping RELENG_4 and "make buildworld" etc. >=20 > Well, imagine my dismay when I was greeted with 4.10-BETA instead... >=20 > Is this release considered stable? It isn't even mentioned on the FreeBSD > page. Or did I stuff up, and should have used RELENG_4_9_X instead? At the moment, 4.10-BETA =3D=3D STABLE. Within the the week, this will change to 4.10-RC1, then maybe 4.10-RC2 and finally 4.10-STABLE. > Are there any, umm, release notes for 4.10-BETA, so I can see what I'm > in for? They're in src/release, but you do have STABLE. The "BETA" in 4.10-BETA means that we're considering this code for release as 4.10-RELEASE, and that's all. Ceri --=20 --4T94Hejb80K+e1gX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAh51qocfcwTS3JF8RAj3jAKCnib/2ExiL3AELzNM9KF1pH5Ig1QCdGyeV hMSZV03VrqRQBGfBsKrjz2Y= =4b36 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4T94Hejb80K+e1gX--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040422102442.GU32710>