From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 22 08:46:29 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 466A116A401 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:46:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 040A643D68 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:46:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFC221A4DED; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 00:46:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B777853F62; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 03:46:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 03:46:24 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway To: rakhesh@rakhesh.com Message-ID: <20060322084624.GA94483@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20060322050432.7801.qmail@web54512.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060322050432.7801.qmail@web54512.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 6.1-BETA 4 stable for normal use? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:46:29 -0000 --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 09:04:32PM -0800, Rakhesh Sasidharan wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I'd like to try out FreeBSD and was wondering whether > I should start with 6.1-BETA4 or 6.0? Its just for > home use anyways, more as a way to fool around with > FreeBSD a bit, so was wondering if 6.1-BETA4 would > suffice for the purpose ... is it stable enough or > would it give me issues?=20 Yes, it's quite stable and has many fewer bugs than 6.0. Kris --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEIQ7fWry0BWjoQKURAj1CAJwPOioqxUzVRVf94MYSIiVSNSQhfwCfQ3Hf GaMd37pzAsnO46/C+pYMtPA= =gEC6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB--