From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Jun 29 12:48:23 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from dt052n3e.san.rr.com (dt052n3e.san.rr.com [204.210.33.62]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C142537B75B for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:48:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Received: from slave (doug@slave [10.0.0.1]) by dt052n3e.san.rr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA09531; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:48:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:48:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton X-Sender: doug@dt052n3e.san.rr.com To: Andy Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 3.5 now available . . . . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Andy wrote: > 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. It's a pretty safe bet that your problems won't have been fixed if you didn't tell anyone about them. Doug -- "Live free or die" - State motto of my ancestral homeland, New Hampshire Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message