Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 13:46:14 +0700 From: Erich Dollansky <erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: Peter Maloney <peter.maloney@brockmann-consult.de> Subject: Re: FreeBSD9 and the sheer number of problem reports Message-ID: <201202241346.15160.erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com> In-Reply-To: <4F46ADC8.2080408@brockmann-consult.de> References: <4F46847D.4010908@my.gd> <op.v95ejibz34t2sn@tech304> <4F46ADC8.2080408@brockmann-consult.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Friday 24 February 2012 04:21:12 Peter Maloney wrote: > Am 23.02.2012 21:15, schrieb Mark Felder: > > On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:25:01 -0600, Damien Fleuriot <ml@my.gd> wrote: > > > >> > >> Now, I find the number of problem reports regarding 9.0-RELEASE alarming > >> and I'm growing more and more fearful towards it. > > > I suggest these concepts should be tested: > I can tell you what in practical terms stops me from testing very often. The switch back to the running version. Let me suggest this. Currently, we have on the disk normally two kernels. The current one and the last one. Why not add a third one called testing? Add then an entry into the boot menu that users can switch between the current kernel and a kernel they just installed for testing. I know that I can do this manually. But this is the point where it becomes difficult for the majority of people. As FreeBSD needs a large amount of testing on unknown hardware, this could increase the number of actual testers without much effort. Ok, the developers must then be ready to deal with reports which miss many things. Erich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201202241346.15160.erichfreebsdlist>