From owner-freebsd-hubs Fri Jan 18 19:32:47 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org Received: from squall.waterspout.com (squall.waterspout.com [208.13.56.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41BC437B404; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 19:32:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by squall.waterspout.com (Postfix, from userid 1050) id 893E59B08; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 22:32:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 22:32:29 -0500 From: Will Andrews To: jason andrade Cc: Murray Stokely , hubs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Please let me know.. Message-ID: <20020118223229.I73815@squall.waterspout.com> Reply-To: Will Andrews References: <20020118125416.GN18200@freebsdmall.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-hubs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 01:02:15PM +1000, jason andrade wrote: > sounds ok to me - in reality for RC images, it would seem to make > sense to only create the `mini' ISO - this would further encourage > downloads and testing. if people need packages, they could either > build them using the ports tree, or download them separately from > the pacckages-4.5-release (aka packages-4-stable) tree. In principle, I agree with you, but...: > unless of course you are actually trying to test the CD creation > process (including the package tree) as well as the actual 4.5 OS > release.. I still think packages from CDs need to be tested for at least one RC because we've occasionally seen strange problems with them before due to the way CDs were handled by sysinstall. -- wca To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hubs" in the body of the message