From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Oct 21 15:52:36 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA22953 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:52:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dt053nb4.san.rr.com (dt053nb4.san.rr.com [204.210.34.180]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA22946 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:52:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Studded@gorean.org) Received: from gorean.org (Studded@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dt053nb4.san.rr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA22210; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:51:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Studded@gorean.org) Message-ID: <362E657F.34F3AA87@gorean.org> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:51:43 -0700 From: Studded Organization: Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b2 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2.7-STABLE-1015 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chuck Robey CC: Nate Williams , The Subject: Re: CVS version updated References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Chuck Robey wrote: > Several tools, like the system build tools (gcc, linker, etc) and most > obviously cvs, are so important to keep stable, that the first, second, > and 99th consideration is stability. Upgrades are, comparatively > speaking, a minor consideration. I couldn't agree more that stability is important, especially in -Stable. Although I think a few more chances can be taken in -Current. :) > That's not to say your comment is worthless, it's not, and it's good to > be reminded, especially about the status of those selfsame important > tools. On top of that, it's slow pressure of this sort that eventually > does see things upgraded. Yes, I've learned this lesson over time. While I'm at it, 'patch' is out of date too. :) > You learn to have a knee-jerk negative > reaction to folks who want to always go with the latest bugs, tho. Actually my post specifically said that it would be a good idea to wait before going with 1.10, and that the Y2K problem is more important and fixed in the 1.9 branch. But I see your point. At the same time, Y2K issues are an important consideration in today's climate. In fact, I meant to mention previously that we should put an entry for this on our page until it's fixed. > I think the next big step past a elf kernel is moving gcc up to 2.8.1, > which many of us would like to see. I think it's got a real chance in > the next 1-3 months. I really hope you're not saying that more than one upgrade can't happen at the same time. Doug -- *** Chief Operations Officer, DALnet IRC network *** Go PADRES! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message