Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 17:46:27 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: NO MORE '-BETA' Message-ID: <20010316174627.B9267@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20010316171845.U29888@fw.wintelcom.net>; from bright@wintelcom.net on Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 05:18:45PM -0800 References: <20010316170755.S29888@fw.wintelcom.net> <XFMail.010316171535.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20010316171845.U29888@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 05:18:45PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> You stated that -BETA actually is a bit less stable than -STABLE and
> hence should be -BETA. The problem is that:
> THERE'S NO WARNING UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY BOOT WITH YOUR '-BETA' SYSTEM
Ok, so now you've pissed off JKH so much he has nixed
4.4-{BETA,PRERELEASE,whatever}. Well, the potential bugginess of -STABLE
right before release will still be there, but there will be nothing to
alert the user about it. All you've done is removed valuable testing of
Ports building.
Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
--
-- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX
Disclaimer: Not speaking for FreeBSD, just expressing my own opinion.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010316174627.B9267>