From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 10 15:36:29 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D08C16A41B for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:36:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mh@kernel32.de) Received: from crivens.terrorteam.de (crivens.terrorteam.de [81.169.171.191]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F8413C4B3 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:36:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mh@kernel32.de) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by crivens.terrorteam.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D53C0B023F; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:08:47 +0200 (CEST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:08:47 +0200 From: Marian Hettwer To: =?UTF-8?Q?Dag-Erling=20Sm=C3=83=C2=B8rgrav=20 , ?=@terrorteam.de In-Reply-To: <86przndoe8.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <86przndoe8.fsf@ds4.des.no> Message-ID: <6aefb8ae4a2de897081a2792cdc17ea1@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: mh@kernel32.de User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.1b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Christian Baer Subject: Re: suggest renaming and extending the -CURRENT and -STABLE lines X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:36:29 -0000 On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:39:59 +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Christian Baer writes: >> If someone sees the result of RELENG_6 is called STABLE, he or she will >> problably think, this is the line where bug fixes are added, security >> problems fixed and the whole thing is meant for production systems. > While >> the first two things may be true, I would not suggest RELENG_6 for >> production systems. Normally the -STABLE line works fine. But I *have* >> times in the past where a driver was changes and suddenly the system >> *didn't* work after a reboot or showed strange behaviour. > > YMMV. I run both CURRENT and STABLE on production systems. > Which is higly interesting and important and has basically nothing to do with the original mail / question by the original author ;-) Back to topic? The problem is, that STABLE in FreeBSD-speak is meant as API Stable, not stable in regards to a broken driver or in regards to a branch where the source is frozen. However, I do agree with the original author that it leads to confusion, because API stabilitiy is not the first thing that pops into your mind when you read FreeBSD 6-STABLE ;-) I tend to believe that a renaming won't happen, though. AFAIK the naming convention in FreeBSD haven't changed since... well... forever? ;) It may became something like a holy cow :) My thoughts. Cheers, Marian PS.: I managed to run CURRENT from yesterday on a IBM HS21 Blade with this bloody mpt(4) and bce(4) chipsets. It works! Thumbs Up! The bce(4) was panicing in earlier CURRENTs I tried :)