From owner-freebsd-stable  Thu Jun 29 12: 6:52 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mail.lewman.org (lowrider.lewman.org [209.67.240.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D14EC37B9EF
	for <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:06:46 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from deimos@lewman.com)
Received: by mail.lewman.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 93C663D32; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 15:06:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mail.lewman.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91A135BBF
	for <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 15:06:41 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 15:06:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Andy <deimos@lewman.com>
X-Sender: deimos@lowrider.lewman.org
Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: FreeBSD 3.5 now available . . . . . 
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006282037080.63476-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006291505020.5819-100000@lowrider.lewman.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> I don't know what you're talking about "merging into future 4.x builds".
> 4.x is already much more stable than 3.x ever was..the bug-fixing has
> already taken place during the development of the 4.0 branch.

	Not to start a massive flamewar here, but in my personal
experience with multiple FreeBSD boxes in a live environment, I've found
that 3.x is much more stable than the 4.x servers.  I've gone so far as to
revert the 4.x server back to 3.x.  I'm going to revisit the issue when it
becomes 4.1.

-- 

|  Andy   |     e-mail      |      web       |
|         | andy@lewman.com | www.lewman.com |

You are the only person to ever get this message.



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message