From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 26 12:05:12 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CF01106564A for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 12:05:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C15128FC19 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 12:05:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iaeo4 with SMTP id o4so6534331iae.13 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 04:05:11 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of utisoft@gmail.com designates 10.50.76.130 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.50.76.130; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of utisoft@gmail.com designates 10.50.76.130 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=utisoft@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=utisoft@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.50.76.130]) by 10.50.76.130 with SMTP id k2mr12571276igw.22.1330257911301 (num_hops = 1); Sun, 26 Feb 2012 04:05:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=T+n5oExfFOVfGN1ccRUS6G2IrVCkCzNs6bzOHFjX5g0=; b=pEjG3Nqxyk1TXJB4vYakSL7JFscxQmVHM+D6hqMSMHoMSVoyNAOlknjoe4UNef/Gv5 w6NRjItOHRDTnpr3LrBGf2Y2iU06gH/EvPkM4k4Ebznzw0NOr4Z2QPFT7itrey3mv0Z1 9a2ksXyHVBTm9o7Npv9vQ+w0iDtWzGLnUTLTY= Received: by 10.50.76.130 with SMTP id k2mr10180679igw.22.1330257911262; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 04:05:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: utisoft@gmail.com Received: by 10.231.155.20 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 04:04:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201202261832.17793.erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com> References: <4F46847D.4010908@my.gd> <201202240835.32041.erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com> <201202261832.17793.erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com> From: Chris Rees Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 12:04:41 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: gbPx7cY6IMfCUhBnKmySqkpTcbY Message-ID: To: Erich Dollansky Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD9 and the sheer number of problem reports X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 12:05:12 -0000 On 26 February 2012 11:32, Erich Dollansky w= rote: > Hi, > > On Sunday 26 February 2012 18:16:53 Chris Rees wrote: >> On 24 February 2012 01:35, Erich Dollansky wrote: >> > >> > On Friday 24 February 2012 01:25:01 Damien Fleuriot wrote: >> >> >> >> This is NOT a troll. >> >> This is NOT a flame. >> >> Do NOT hijack this thread to troll/flame. >> >> >> > allow them some fun too. >> >> >> >> >> >> Now, I find the number of problem reports regarding 9.0-RELEASE alarm= ing >> >> and I'm growing more and more fearful towards it. >> >> >> >> In the current state of things, I have *absolutely* no wish to run it= in >> >> production :( >> >> >> > Did you read deeply into the strategy behind the releases? If I rememb= er right, the odd numbers are a little bit more experimental compared to th= e even numbers. For myself, I try to stick with even numbers whenever possi= ble. If I install FreeBSD on a serious machine, I never use x.0. It must be= at least x.1. >> >> There's no such odd/even number policy with FreeBSD-- I think you're >> thinking of another OS ;) >> > maybe something got stuck in my head with the move from 4 to 5. 4 to 5 was SMP-related, and when the Project decided to move to time-based rather than feature-based releases -- pure coincidence that 5 was odd. > How easy was the move to 6 then? _Just_ before my time I'm afraid ;) > Independent of this, it is still true that there is always the older bran= ch available when a new one opens at .0. > >> You're right that x.0 is slightly more experimental in general though >> (by its nature, it must be). > > And has nothing to do with FreeBSD as such. > Exactly :) Chris