From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Nov 23 20:04:19 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id UAA00575 for stable-outgoing; Sun, 23 Nov 1997 20:04:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00570 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 1997 20:04:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.7/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA20417; Sun, 23 Nov 1997 20:03:50 -0800 (PST) To: Craig Wilson cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stability Of FreeBSD 2.2.5 CD-ROM Release In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 24 Nov 1997 14:20:52 GMT." <34798D44.BA8@natsoft.com.au> Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 20:03:50 -0800 Message-ID: <20412.880344230@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > or am I best to stay with 2.2.2, which has been very stable, and wait > for 2.2.6 to be released. I have a FreeBSD subscription. Well, while I've no doubt that someone on this list could quickly pipe up with a fix for kern/4844 and, most likely, any other open PRs you might be concerned about, I still have to question any desire to upgrade a system which is working just fine the way it is. :-) To put it another way, there are always a large number of hypothetical reasons both for and against upgrading to any new release of FreeBSD, and in the final analysis it's really much more down to how a given release is doing for *you* and in your environment. I know of folks who are still happily running FreeBSD 1.1.5.1 today and have absolutely no intention of changing that fact for the simple reason that 1.1.5.1 works just fine for them and, not being broken, is nothing that they care to fix. :) Jordan