From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 7 20:04:37 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A7DC1065676; Sat, 7 Jun 2008 20:04:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jrhett@netconsonance.com) Received: from mail.netconsonance.com (mail.netconsonance.com [198.207.204.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CE4B8FC1A; Sat, 7 Jun 2008 20:04:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jrhett@netconsonance.com) Received: from 4.151.178.10.in-addr.arpa (m420e36d0.tmodns.net [208.54.14.66]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netconsonance.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m57K4Pqs060350; Sat, 7 Jun 2008 13:04:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jrhett@netconsonance.com) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at netconsonance.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.036 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.036 tagged_above=-999 required=3.5 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1.44, AWL=-0.141, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.617] Message-Id: <2892DF94-B346-4F36-9D32-165A2EA462D1@netconsonance.com> From: Jo Rhett To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= In-Reply-To: <861w3cf2pj.fsf@ds4.des.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v924) Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 13:04:16 -0700 References: <9B7FE91B-9C2E-4732-866C-930AC6022A40@netconsonance.com> <4846D849.2090005@FreeBSD.org> <80D7EE2D-A970-407B-A42C-AD17500BC463@netconsonance.com> <861w3cf2pj.fsf@ds4.des.no> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.924) Cc: Doug Barton , FreeBSD Stable Subject: Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 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: Sat, 07 Jun 2008 20:04:37 -0000 On Jun 5, 2008, at 6:09 AM, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > If you have issues with 6.3, your time would be better spent reporting > them (by which I mean describe them in detail) than waving your =20 > hands in > the air and yelling at people. Must you resort to nonsense and hyperbole? I'd said nearly a dozen times that the issues I have aren't =20 specifics. I am questioning the overall policy for EoL here. Even if =20= it was known to work properly on my hardware the overwhelming amount =20 of bugs in 6.3 indicates an unstable release. The diffs between 6.3 =20 and 6-STABLE are greater than the diffs between 6.2 and 6.3 last time =20= I checked. I can't understand the logic in having only a single supported version =20= of the OS, especially one which so many known/reported/fixed-post-=20 release bugs. And please don't respond if you can't avoid resorting to hyperbole =20 like what I quoted above. --=20 Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source =20 and other randomness