From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Jan  4 14:52:20 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id OAA21193
          for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 14:52:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id OAA21188
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 14:52:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.4/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA05321; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 14:51:54 -0800 (PST)
To: Eivind Eklund <eivind@dimaga.com>
cc: Jimbo Bahooli <moke@fools.ecpnet.com>, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: 2.2-BETA install fraught with peril? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 04 Jan 1997 14:39:49 +0100."
             <3.0.32.19970104143948.00a0e230@dimaga.com> 
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 1997 14:51:54 -0800
Message-ID: <5317.852418314@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> The ALPHAs and especially BETAs are released to get a 100% stable version
> before a -RELEASE.  Thus, all problems with the sysinstall should, IMHO, be
> of interest, as it is interesting to have them fixed before release.  I've
> been running FreeBSD for about a year now, including kernel hacking it to
> get it to run on some systems.  I think I qualify as knowing it.

This is all perfectly correct, and we very much appreciate Eivind's
byg reports!

						Jordan