From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 29 12:06:36 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 566D49C3 for ; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:06:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpaasial@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com (mail-wi0-f173.google.com [209.85.212.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA12F8FC08 for ; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:06:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id hn17so8596131wib.0 for ; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 04:06:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=oYE2/k4KfdTBidxhxNyTeL4lNrJPRrxcLhivfHo0uJg=; b=UrVeJECt8QwK4dhO0NI75/J91sicB6A5vlWFMp5nUm/LroIhJODSFkkE3DFNVWL9l7 BUSq402c/lnuO5tkVw97XK6tRDgEP+PLLlgFR3eTK3I2FNH8kttIpQeYnAZqEInTJknX WAdZKEhsgiME5KK+g2wRm880Uk/aPqSkpuDQJSuUsfvb+wG0HyfrwA5pbsS2+COXC9Ir hPXJmXkGFtKMcQGQlDc26UnT9Qv1VpweNyQzK2mg1RVAzGA8bwLL3YKl9vVpRWri7rwv AhBM5lls/nAB+XXPTqIULQ122DPbiJoLkIs1AiR3aXkCcTRADi55UnJQEw/0T5wO/nq8 2hRQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.93.40 with SMTP id cr8mr57052708wib.15.1356782789669; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 04:06:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.172.197 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 04:06:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <87.5C.07640.028DED05@smtp02.insight.synacor.com> Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 14:06:29 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 minimal ram requirements From: Kimmo Paasiala To: Thomas Mueller Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Mark Linimon , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org 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 12:06:36 -0000 On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Kimmo Paasiala wrote: > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Thomas Mueller wrote: >> 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 > > Most likely you took the stable/9 aka 9-STABLE sources. They have > internal name "9.1-PRERELEASE" until the 9.1-RELEASE goes out of the > door. Erm too little coffee this early... I should have written "IF" you are following stable/9 aka 9-STABLE the 9.1-PRERELEASE is what you will see as the internal name until 9.1-RELEASE is released.