Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:02:26 +0100 (MET) From: Mipam <mipam@ibb.net> To: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE status Message-ID: <Pine.BSO.4.56.0502081400570.22612@ux11.ltcm.net> In-Reply-To: <200502081358.08045.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> References: <Pine.BSO.4.56.0502081306440.28295@ux11.ltcm.net> <Pine.BSO.4.56.0502081336420.22612@ux11.ltcm.net> <200502081358.08045.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Michael Nottebrock wrote: > On Tuesday, 8. February 2005 13:38, Mipam wrote: > > > Okay, so then the ULE sched is fairly stable then? > > But it's still not the default scheduler? > > It will never become the default scheduler in 5.x again. 5.x went into -STABLE > mode with 4BSD, and that's why the default will remain 4BSD. > > > Is it safe to use right now > > under RELENG_5 or not? > > As already said, you need to try *yourself*. Okay clear, but the fact that it's in 5-stable suggests the it's stable to use, else why would it be in 5-stable. Maybe i'm completly wrong in this interpretation? Bye, Mipam.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSO.4.56.0502081400570.22612>