From owner-freebsd-alpha Wed Mar 17 12:49:24 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from herring.nlsystems.com (nlsys.demon.co.uk [158.152.125.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A7A515339 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 12:49:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Received: from localhost (dfr@localhost) by herring.nlsystems.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA56182; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 20:51:23 GMT (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 20:51:23 +0000 (GMT) From: Doug Rabson To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: Steve Sizemore , alpha@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Which version to run In-Reply-To: <62436.921664740@zippy.cdrom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 17 Mar 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > install, I had to use a 4.0 snapshot. However, I'd really rather > > track stable (since that's what I use on my intel machines), if that > > is possible. Is 3.1 stable really stable for the alpha platform, or > > do I need to use current? > > It might be better to track -current just for a little while, > at least until 3.1-stable catches up for the alpha. I don't > think it's actually diverged all that much at all; Doug? The main difference is that -current uses the new portable syscons. I do intend to merge that over at some point but I can't predict when. -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message