From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul  1 19:58:21 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 824F916A41C
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Fri,  1 Jul 2005 19:58:21 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from nikolas.britton@gmail.com)
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.192])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A9BC43D5C
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Fri,  1 Jul 2005 19:58:20 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from nikolas.britton@gmail.com)
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i4so383949wra
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;
	h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
	b=HFojdNOkECyhEn9G80lhZ2U6UkcG9yilGq8fTyL0YXUjGK59dqYTyFciDzD4UTPOxipVBwfoF6f5GB0zEXhtzyWthZr+abnoeqLy4ChqWdkno0hCQuPaY/MdooOrt76wM8V9EFh1FS6r3JlVb8afnXPuK57vhGss7upZP3PFI3k=
Received: by 10.54.47.59 with SMTP id u59mr1780915wru;
	Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.54.124.2 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <ef10de9a0507011258653cec39@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 14:58:20 -0500
From: Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com>
To: Matthew Grooms <mgrooms@seton.org>
In-Reply-To: <42C598E3.9000503@seton.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <42C56340.4070705@seton.org>
	<ef10de9a05070111282c04a035@mail.gmail.com>
	<42C598E3.9000503@seton.org>
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Question about the RELENG_5 branch ...
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com>
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 19:58:21 -0000

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.