From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 27 08:29:04 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AEE516A424 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:29:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kgunders@teamcool.net) Received: from koyukuk.teamcool.net (koyukuk.teamcool.net [209.161.34.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1017B43D45 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:29:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kgunders@teamcool.net) Received: from koyukuk.teamcool.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by koyukuk.teamcool.net (TeamCool Rocks) with ESMTP id 74DE9F80F for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:29:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from cochise.teamcool.net (unknown [192.168.1.57]) by koyukuk.teamcool.net (TeamCool Rocks) with ESMTP id 2A40CF805 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:29:03 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:29:02 -0700 From: Ken Gunderson To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20060127012902.61e974dd.kgunders@teamcool.net> Organization: Teamcool Networks X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.9.12 (GTK+ 2.6.7; i386-portbld-freebsd5.4) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Subject: the jem report bashes fbsd-6.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:29:04 -0000 An older article I just happened across: Personally think he's far off the mark, e.g. "The AMD64 edition didn't work well on two systems. Since it has a long and inglorious history of severe stability problems that appear to have carried over into 6.0, I would strongly recommend using the i386 edition of FreeBSD instead of the AMD64 edition." Definitely not congruous with my experiences but then my amd64 systems are far from stressed:-) But thought I'd post the link in case someone wanted to address in more detail. -- Best regards, Ken Gunderson Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon?