Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 14:58:20 -0500 From: Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> To: Matthew Grooms <mgrooms@seton.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Question about the RELENG_5 branch ... Message-ID: <ef10de9a0507011258653cec39@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <42C598E3.9000503@seton.org> References: <42C56340.4070705@seton.org> <ef10de9a05070111282c04a035@mail.gmail.com> <42C598E3.9000503@seton.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7/1/05, Matthew Grooms <mgrooms@seton.org> wrote: > I was under the impression that the only patches being back ported > in 5.4-RELEASE are from the security team to fix security related > issues. Do patches that resolve problems that are known to cause panics > get back ported as well? >=20 Yes it's possible. The severity of the problem and how common it is determines likelihood of it getting backported. Also the 5.4 branch has been label an errata branch so that makes it even more likely for big problem to be backported. http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.4R/errata_policy.html It's never a good idea to move production equipment to -STABLE. -STABLE doesn't imply that the code is stable, only that it won't have drastic changes like -CURRENT does. Doing this should be your last option.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ef10de9a0507011258653cec39>