From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Dec 17 11:16:51 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA13157 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 11:16:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA13151 Sun, 17 Dec 1995 11:16:46 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id GAA17231; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 06:11:27 +1100 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 06:11:27 +1100 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199512171911.GAA17231@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: andreas@knobel.gun.de, julian@jhome.dialix.com Subject: Re: FreeBSD-current-stable ??? Cc: cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de, current@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org, jkh@freebsd.org Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk >> Hi FreeBSD core team ! >> >> [ Possibly I'm speaking for many other people here ] >It's possible. Possibly for non-developers :-). >> >> Generally I would be interested to help testing and debugging new >> FreeBSD-current features. But when reading the -current mailing list, >> FreeBSD-current, so to say FreeBSD-2.2 in it's early days, seems to be ^^^^^^^^^^^ >> an instability nightmare. Perhaps this expression is a bit oversized, >> but please understand my point of view. >I do dissagree. -current is exceptionally stable for what it is... I agree with Julian. >I run -currrent (up until last week) on my machine at TFS.com >and I have had NO troubles with it... I have had only one serious problem (2 core dumps apparently caused by some vm change in the last month). Bruce