From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 8 13:29:30 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4327E16A4D6 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:29:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (pop.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2C0E543D48 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:29:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from michaelnottebrock@gmx.net) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 08 Feb 2005 13:29:27 -0000 Received: from pD955FBD7.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO lofi.dyndns.org) (217.85.251.215) by mail.gmx.net (mp005) with SMTP; 08 Feb 2005 14:29:27 +0100 X-Authenticated: #443188 Received: from kiste.my.domain (kiste.my.domain [192.168.8.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by lofi.dyndns.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j18DTKaY040453 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:29:21 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from michaelnottebrock@gmx.net) From: Michael Nottebrock To: Mipam Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:29:14 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 References: <200502081358.08045.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart5512871.imPRWHRlRU"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200502081429.19136.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE status X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 13:29:30 -0000 --nextPart5512871.imPRWHRlRU Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday, 8. February 2005 14:02, Mipam wrote: > 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. The changes that have been merged to stable have been tested for some time = in=20 6-CURRENT, so they're not completely experimental, yes. > Maybe i'm completly wrong in this interpretation? I'm not sure what your interpretation is. If you go by your own definition= =20 (what's in -stable should be safe to use), why do you ask at all? In any=20 case, the ULE MFC commits are only a few days old, so there's naturally not= =20 much feedback available, good or bad. If you want to play it safe, wait a=20 week or a month and monitor this lists for complaints before trying it=20 yourself. =2D-=20 ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org --nextPart5512871.imPRWHRlRU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBCCL6vXhc68WspdLARApMEAKCeeB13pqpshXf7UVIbGWC7HSZjmACdGTmp 1ieEet+K5fws92hGgCEm1bM= =BggY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart5512871.imPRWHRlRU--