From owner-freebsd-stable Wed Sep 13 10: 3: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 194F337B423; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 10:03:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id KAA14165; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 10:03:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 10:03:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: The Hermit Hacker Cc: Francisco Reyes , Gregory Sutter , "freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG" Subject: Re: 4.1-STABLE fails to 'buildkernel'? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, The Hermit Hacker wrote: > Note also that it states "If you are a commercial user or someone who puts > maximum stability ..." Kinda difficult to get 'maximum stability' when > the code won't even compile ... And thats not an inappropriate suggestion. It just means that GIVEN THAT the code will occasionally have compilation problems, and even more occasionally catastrophic runtime bugs, that the smart commercial user will have a careful deployment strategy that reflects this fact. Again, "stable" doesn't refer to the compilation process, and bugs which will damage an installed system are very rare. Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message