From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 29 11:46:47 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AD5D3B0 for ; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 11:46:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mueller23@insightbb.com) Received: from mail.insightbb.com (smtp2.insight.synacor.com [208.47.185.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8C7F8FC0A for ; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 11:46:46 +0000 (UTC) X_CMAE_Category: 0,0 Undefined,Undefined X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=Z4Vu7QtA c=1 sm=0 a=Dm9TOXL4taQ+Gy1KovpL+A==:17 a=jLN7EqiLvroA:10 a=9YQ-1ebCAAAA:8 a=mLk7NxnQG0AA:10 a=-FGs326eAAAA:8 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=kurQqiNWJuq-8Ku42RMA:9 a=0Rv9XxPPRogA:10 a=SV7veod9ZcQA:10 a=Dm9TOXL4taQ+Gy1KovpL+A==:117 X-CM-Score: 0 X-Scanned-by: Cloudmark Authority Engine Authentication-Results: smtp02.insight.synacor.com smtp.mail=mueller23@insightbb.com; spf=softfail; sender-id=softfail Authentication-Results: smtp02.insight.synacor.com header.from=mueller23@insightbb.com; sender-id=softfail Received-SPF: softfail (smtp02.insight.synacor.com: transitional domain insightbb.com does not designate 74.130.198.7 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.130.198.7] ([74.130.198.7:57506] helo=localhost) by mail.insightbb.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.49 r(42060/42061)) with ESMTP id 87/5C-07640-028DED05; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 06:46:40 -0500 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 06:46:40 -0500 Message-ID: <87.5C.07640.028DED05@smtp02.insight.synacor.com> From: "Thomas Mueller" To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 9.1 minimal ram requirements Cc: Mark Linimon X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 11:46:47 -0000 from Mark Linimon : > In an ideal world, the bits that will almost certainly become FreeBSD 9.1 > would not appear on the masters, or any of the mirrors, until the same > instant that the release announcement is set to freebsd-announce@FreeBSD.org. > In practice this doesn't happen. If there is some clever way for that to > happen, we haven't found it yet. > It has happened in the past that even as the release bits were propogating, > One Last Big Bug was found and those bits had to be pulled and re-done. It > would have looked like you had FreeBSD Release X.Y but you wouldn't have had > the final bits that everyone else did. > I understand your frustration that this process takes days, and in general > the frustration with this particular release -- more than you could possibly > believe. However, until we figure out the process that would exist in an > ideal world, this is what we have, and so if you need something that will be > in 9.1, your options at this moment are: build an install from 9-STABLE; find > one of the snapshots (and no, I am not the one to ask, sorry); or wait. > Sorry, but that's the best I can offer right now. > mcl So that's why I downloaded-updated source tree using svn, built and installed, and uname -a revealed 9.1-PRERELEASE. It seemed strange after 9.1-RELEASE became available on FTP servers December 5. Maybe they can do something to better document "device ctl" in GENERIC; I kept it because it was there, and one is led to think it is needed due to changes in FreeBSD. Tom