From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 10 21:45:18 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 2260B16A420 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:45:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jon@web-tricks.net) Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.192.82]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A55DB43D60 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:45:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jon@web-tricks.net) Received: from dragon (c-24-7-180-38.hsd1.ca.comcast.net[24.7.180.38]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with SMTP id <20060210214514m1200d64p5e>; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:45:14 +0000 Message-ID: <000c01c62e8b$4a22bc00$fac8a8c0@dragon> From: "Jon Holstrom" To: References: <43E7EDA2.7070807@rogers.com> <001201c62b84$4d591900$fac8a8c0@dragon> <20060207014535.GA10328@xor.obsecurity.org> <3aaaa3a0602082040l4917c5cfo@mail.gmail.com> <20060209054333.GA68771@xor.obsecurity.org><00aa01c62e76$6e552410$fac8a8c0@dragon> <43ECF0C5.7000306@chillt.de> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:45:20 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670 Subject: Re: freeBSD 5.5 Prerelease ( 5.4 stable ) 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, 10 Feb 2006 21:45:18 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bartosz Fabianowski" To: "Jon Holstrom" Cc: Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 12:00 PM Subject: Re: freeBSD 5.5 Prerelease ( 5.4 stable ) >> but i need a working OS, not a bata ! > > If you don't like using a beta (nothing wrong with that), you definitely > should not be using -stable either. There are even less promises > regarding the reliability and quality of -stable than there are of a > beta. After all, during the prerelease and beta cycles, the tree is > getting in shape for a release and there is a focus on fixing as many > little nits as possible. In between releases, bigger MFCs might hit > -stable from time to time and make it less reliable. > > So, while you are getting confused by the branch name changing, you > should also rethink whether you want -stable at all. It really seems > like you should be aiming for RELENG_5_4 (and then RELENG_5_5 once 5.5 > is out) instead. > > - Bartosz >____________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > Thank you much for your input. after thinking this over a few weeks ago, it did seem to be the best bet to go for 5.4 stable. i gave 6.0 release its chance, things didnt seem to work as i needed them. 5.4 release does not support Eclipse 3.1 at all. this is why i needed 5.4 stable ! as hard as i tried to stay simple on using FreeBSD, FreeBSD led me to 5.4 stable as of Feb1, 2006 at 10:00 GMT..... all working this far. Software has its own mind, it will & has led us here. i could go on & on about what i think about all this. but the truth is, FreeBSD software led me here ! What i am upto with freebsd 5.4 stable ? --==--==--==--==--==--==--==-- FreeBSD 5.4 stable. Apache 1.3 PHP4 MySQL 4.1 OSCommerce 2.2 MS2 JavaSDK 1.4 Tomcat 5 Eclipse 3.1 <------- needs 5.4 stable PHPEclipse --==--==--==--==--==--==--==--