Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 26 Feb 2012 11:16:53 +0000
From:      Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org>
To:        Erich Dollansky <erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD9 and the sheer number of problem reports
Message-ID:  <CADLo83_H_v4mRhwptyoL7SqA7N8Fy-wg=8EuCu5DzAYRMU8FGA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <201202240835.32041.erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com>
References:  <4F46847D.4010908@my.gd> <201202240835.32041.erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 24 February 2012 01:35, Erich Dollansky <erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com> w=
rote:
> Hi,
>
> On Friday 24 February 2012 01:25:01 Damien Fleuriot wrote:
>>
>> This is NOT a troll.
>> This is NOT a flame.
>> Do NOT hijack this thread to troll/flame.
>>
> allow them some fun too.
>>
>>
>> Now, I find the number of problem reports regarding 9.0-RELEASE alarming
>> and I'm growing more and more fearful towards it.
>>
>> In the current state of things, I have *absolutely* no wish to run it in
>> production :(
>>
> Did you read deeply into the strategy behind the releases? If I remember =
right, the odd numbers are a little bit more experimental compared to the e=
ven numbers. For myself, I try to stick with even numbers whenever possible=
. If I install FreeBSD on a serious machine, I never use x.0. It must be at=
 least x.1.

There's no such odd/even number policy with FreeBSD-- I think you're
thinking of another OS ;)

You're right that x.0 is slightly more experimental in general though
(by its nature, it must be).

Chris



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo83_H_v4mRhwptyoL7SqA7N8Fy-wg=8EuCu5DzAYRMU8FGA>