From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Dec 18 11:48:56 1994 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id LAA09022 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 11:48:56 -0800 Received: from bsd.coe.montana.edu (bsd.coe.montana.edu [153.90.192.29]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) with ESMTP id LAA09000; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 11:48:34 -0800 Received: (nate@localhost) by bsd.coe.montana.edu (8.6.8/8.3) id MAA12590; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 12:52:52 -0700 Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 12:52:52 -0700 From: Nate Williams Message-Id: <199412181952.MAA12590@bsd.coe.montana.edu> In-Reply-To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" "Don't scream.." (Dec 17, 7:17pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Don't scream.. Cc: current@freebsd.org Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > I've talked to both Poul-Henning Kamp and David Greenman about this, > and we all think that a snap-shot of FreeBSD-current under the > brand-name (and version) of 2.0.5 is quite possible, and perhaps even > eminently desirable. Sure, there will be some bugs in -current. It appears there are some pretty significant bugs in the networking code that need to be addressed before -current would be usable. Most of the people running -current report that they can't get their IP connections to work at all, and this is completely unacceptable for a BSD OS. To me, the above bug is much worse than throwing together another release that is not well-tested. Nate