From owner-freebsd-current  Wed Apr 21 10:55: 6 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from misha.cisco.com (misha.cisco.com [171.69.206.50])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 66AF5156D2; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:54:45 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from mi@misha.cisco.com)
Received: (from mi@localhost)
	by misha.cisco.com (8.9.2/8.9.1) id NAA31922;
	Wed, 21 Apr 1999 13:51:39 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from mi)
From: Mikhail Teterin <mi@misha.cisco.com>
Message-Id: <199904211751.NAA31922@misha.cisco.com>
Subject: Re: solid NFS patch #6 avail for -current - need testers files)
In-Reply-To: <19990421174502.ECEC61F2A@spinner.netplex.com.au> from Peter Wemm at "Apr 22, 1999 01:45:01 am"
To: peter@netplex.com.au (Peter Wemm)
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 13:51:39 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: current@freebsd.org, stable@freebsd.org
Reply-To: mi@aldan.algebra.com
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL52 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Peter Wemm once wrote:

> > Great work guys! It almost seems that -current is more stable than
> > -stable!
 
> Funny you should mention it. I've heard this from a number of people
> over the last week.. One has even suggested using a particular
> known-good 4.0 snapshot in preference to a 3.1-stable for a production
> system......

Speaking of, when can we expect to see this wonderfull _stability_
improvement in -stable? I'm setting up a server here, and would
rather have fixed NFS code in it... Yet, jumping to -current is
officially wrong... Thanks!

	-mi


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message