From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 5 17:38:43 2008 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 3BEE6106564A for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 17:38:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx24.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1EE88FC18 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 17:38:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 5067 invoked by uid 399); 5 Jun 2008 17:38:42 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO lap.dougb.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 5 Jun 2008 17:38:42 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4848249E.2050704@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:38:38 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080525) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jo Rhett References: <9B7FE91B-9C2E-4732-866C-930AC6022A40@netconsonance.com><4846D849.2090005@FreeBSD.org> <20080604204325.GD4701@lava.net><20080604234532.GA89656@k7.mavetju> <458FE12C-AE4D-48F9-8193-4663079CEEF8@netconsonance.com> <84EBEA5D3A1F47E79E8E12C4CF4D0314@multiplay.co.uk> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 OpenPGP: id=D5B2F0FB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Stable , Edwin Groothuis , Steven Hartland Subject: Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 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: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 17:38:43 -0000 Jo Rhett wrote: > > On Jun 4, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Steven Hartland wrote: >> I wouldn't be surprised if these are not new bugs, just something >> that others have noticed later than 6.2 and I'd suggest you actually >> try 6.3 to see if they are in fact an issue for you. > > I don't have the resources to load up the systems enough to find these > problems sitting on my desk. And I can't risk production resources for > problems known and reported on the *EXACT* same hardware. Ok, then don't. Just stop whining about it. The 6.2 EOL has been announced from day 1 (and extended once already). If you haven't made adequate preparations, that's not our fault. Furthermore, if your production environment is as overwhelmingly important as you make it out to be, you ought to have provisions for redundancy and failover already. If you don't have that, and don't have a testbed, that's not our fault either. Bruce put it in much more polite terms than I have patience for atm. Open source software isn't "free," and if you're not interested in holding up your end of the bargain, explore other alternatives. > "oh but it won't happen to me" isn't a useful methodology in a > production environment. > > I mean, seriously, I know the majority of you are happy rebooting your > systems 5x daily to run the latest. I'll do that with my home system, > no problem. But I can't do this in a production environment. Ok, then don't. But you probably ought not to insult the professionalism of the people that you're going to be asking for help again at some point. When you do come back, your first message should contain a list of PRs that you're concerned about, and confirmation (per jhb's message) that you have the _exact_ hardware that is referred to in them. If you can't provide that, don't bother. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection