From owner-freebsd-current Sun Sep 10 09:37:35 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id JAA03079 for current-outgoing; Sun, 10 Sep 1995 09:37:35 -0700 Received: from devnull (devnull.mpd.tandem.com [131.124.4.29]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA03071 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 1995 09:37:33 -0700 Received: from olympus by devnull (8.6.8/8.6.6) id LAA27877; Sun, 10 Sep 1995 11:30:31 -0500 Received: by olympus (4.1/TSS2.1) id AA03869; Sun, 10 Sep 95 11:30:01 CDT From: faulkner@mpd.tandem.com (Boyd Faulkner) Message-Id: <9509101630.AA03869@olympus> Subject: Re: sig 11 To: jdl@chromatic.com Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 11:30:01 -0500 (CDT) Cc: jc@irbs.com, freebsd-current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199509092313.QAA28456@xenon.chromatic.com> from "Jon Loeliger" at Sep 9, 95 04:13:12 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL17] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1072 Sender: current-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > > John Capo scribbled: > > These kinds of problems are all part of running -current. Current > > is a development tree and is quite often broken for one reason or > > another. Like the docs say, "The bleeding edge". > > > > Sounds like you should be running -stable rather than -current. > > Hmmm. Is the problem here that people always think they want > to be running "the latest release" and they equate that to > the "current" system and get it wrong? Should we maybe rename > the -current as like, -development, -devel, -bleed or something? > To make it *really* obvious. I mean, I had to actually *read* > FAQ to find this out... :-) > > jdl > Let's not. I don't think I could stand to watch my box come up and say FreeBSD bleeds. :-) One simply must give rope to allow people to hang themselves, else, they will weave their own. -- _______________________________________________________________________ Boyd Faulkner - faulkner@isd.tandem.com - http://cactus.org/~faulkner _______________________________________________________________________