From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jul 27 18:57:06 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id SAA19239 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 1995 18:57:06 -0700 Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id SAA19233 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 1995 18:57:04 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA05016; Thu, 27 Jul 1995 18:56:05 -0700 To: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New 2.1.0-950726-SNAP available - come 'n get it! In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 27 Jul 1995 20:50:36 CDT." Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 18:56:04 -0700 Message-ID: <5014.806896564@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > So, how does 2.1-SNAP compare to the -STABLE code I "sup"ed last night? Should be identical, modulo anything not installed by `make world' like the stuff in /etc. > Should I follow -STABLE daily or simply wait for 2.1-SNAP's? IOW, will the Up to you, really! > SNAP releases match the tree as sup'ed at some particular time and can I > expect the -STABLE tree to remain consistent with itself? (Something that > is NOT true of -CURRENT) Yes, I think.. I'm really not sure what you mean here though! > Will we expect to see 2.2-SNAP's before 2.1 is released? Yes, the minute that enough "new" stuff in 2.2 exists to warrant a snap along that branch. I actually had a 2.2 snap built here but I killed it after realizing that there really wasn't enough difference between 2.1 and 2.2 right now to justify it. That may change. Jordan