From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Apr 22 13:08:09 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA28447 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 22 Apr 1997 13:08:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sand.sentex.ca (sand.sentex.ca [206.222.77.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA28352 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 1997 13:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gravel (gravel.sentex.ca [205.211.165.210]) by sand.sentex.ca (8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id QAA00353; Tue, 22 Apr 1997 16:12:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970422161204.00a67720@sentex.net> X-Sender: mdtancsa@sentex.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 16:12:04 -0400 To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" From: Mike Tancsa Subject: Clearing up the differences between TAG names (was Re: Yet another Adaptec 2940UW problem) Cc: questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <26347.861738712@time.cdrom.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 12:51 PM 4/22/97 -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: >See http://www.freebsd.org/handbook and see the section on staying >syncronized with FreeBSD. It's all there, honest. :) Looking at http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/handbook239.html#480, I just want to make sure that RELENG_2_2 is stable in terms of the code that is committed there is considered stable as opposed to semi-developmental etc... --------- tag=RELENG_2_2 The line of development for FreeBSD-2.2.x. tag=RELENG_2_1_0 The line of development for FreeBSD-2.1.x, also known as FreeBSD-stable. ------------- Call me a whimp, but I would feel better if I saw "also known as FreeBSD-2.2-stable" on the second line of the above quotation ;-) Thanks, ---Mike ********************************************************************** Mike Tancsa (mike@sentex.net) * To do is to be -- Nietzsche Sentex Communications Corp, * To be is to do -- Sartre Cambridge, Ontario * Do be do be do -- Sinatra (http://www.sentex.net/~mdtancsa) *