From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 12 14:07:00 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1698616A41A for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 14:07:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C1D343D4C for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 14:06:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.14] (imini.samsco.home [192.168.254.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k4CE6qbC016121; Fri, 12 May 2006 08:06:58 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <4464967C.50707@samsco.org> Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 08:06:52 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050416 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris References: <44600A42.7030600@samsco.org> <44601F4A.9070802@elischer.org> <446021DE.6040507@rogers.com> <20060511210912.GA1344@zaphod.nitro.dk> <4463DC96.70908@rogers.com> <446402BB.7050201@alumni.rice.edu> <44640422.1000006@rogers.com> <3aaaa3a0605120553i2ccc0b6es8901e15a5ab83318@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3aaaa3a0605120553i2ccc0b6es8901e15a5ab83318@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: Matthias Andree , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6.1 Released X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 14:07:00 -0000 Chris wrote: > On 12/05/06, Matthias Andree wrote: > >> Mike Jakubik writes: >> >> > Jonathan Noack wrote: >> >> The *entire* errata page was from 6.0; it was a mistake. This wasn't >> >> some "put on the rose-colored classes and gloss over major issues" >> >> thing. It was a long release cycle and something was forgotten. >> C'est >> >> la vie. It's always a good idea to check the most up-to-date >> version of >> >> the errata page on the web anyway, so it's *not* too late to update >> it. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > How convenient. These problems needed to be addressed in the release >> > notes, not some on line version. >> >> You lost connection to the ground, Mike. Come back please :-) >> >> People make mistakes, and that applies to both the code as to the >> documentation, and users will know that sometimes problems will be found >> only after the release so they'll check online later when running into a >> problem. The 6.1 release announcement already mentioned the errata >> lapsus BTW and asked people to check on-line, so it appears someone's >> asking for perfection -- but it was decided months ago to stick to a >> schedule rather than making perfect releases. >> >> Having said that, 6.1 is a real and visible improvement over 6.0 for me. >> 6.1 is usable, where 6.0 toppled over every few minutes (I'm talking >> about ral(4) and other nasty stuff such as tmpfs/mdmfs panics in 6.0 - >> ral(4) is what prompted me to do the 5.4->6.0 upgrade). >> >> -- >> Matthias Andree > > > agreed whilst 6.1 isnt bug free lets not forget its a massive > improvement over 6.0 in terms of stability, I still havent seen a > lockup/crash on any of my 6.1 servers and they are all prerelease. > > It did shock me tho they didnt simply repackage the 6.1 release with > updated errata notes it will look amatuerish to have outdated notes in > the package. > > Chris We didn't discover it until the last minute, and repackaging takes 3 days. Scott