From owner-freebsd-stable Wed Sep 13 10:30:49 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from thelab.hub.org (CDR27-115.accesscable.net [24.138.27.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E5F637B423; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 10:30:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (scrappy@localhost) by thelab.hub.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8DHUIM23081; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 14:30:19 -0300 (ADT) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) X-Authentication-Warning: thelab.hub.org: scrappy owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 14:30:18 -0300 (ADT) From: The Hermit Hacker To: Kris Kennaway 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, Kris Kennaway wrote: > 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. Okay, I'll grant you that one ... and, in this case, it was operator error where I didn't do buildworld->buildkernel->installkernel->installworld, *but*, that order is so far buried down in the UPDATING file as to be irrelevant. I try and keep my systems "up to date" within a month, sometimes less, sometimes a bit more, and *automatically* read through /usr/src/UPDATING as far as the last time I upgraded ... whether that be my 5.0-CURRENT system at home, or the 4.1-STABLE machines I have deployed ... I've had several ppl email me private messages complaining that it appear that -STABLE is a drifting island that nobody can get rescued off of when there are problem ... in this case, I had to finally cross-post to -current to find out that I was overlooking the "not so obvious" need to recompile genassym to get through locore.s :( To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message