From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 29 17:16:01 2003 Return-Path: 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 0A4AC16A4CE for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 17:16:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from matrix.tk-pttuntex.com (matrix.tk-pttuntex.com [203.77.209.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 537D943FAF for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 17:15:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from zen@tk-pttuntex.com) Received: from localhost (localhost.tk-pttuntex.com [127.0.0.1]) by matrix.tk-pttuntex.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7247C105C3 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 08:14:07 +0700 (WIT) Received: from matrix.tk-pttuntex.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (matrix.tk-pttuntex.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 06425-07 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 08:14:04 +0700 (WIT) Received: from database.ANGINA (unknown [192.168.0.2]) by matrix.tk-pttuntex.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA09E105C2 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 08:14:04 +0700 (WIT) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 08:20:32 +0700 From: zen X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Business X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1882802546.20031030082032@tk-pttuntex.com> To: stable@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200310291641.JAA27852@lariat.org> References: <200310291641.JAA27852@lariat.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by Tuntex Virus Buster Subject: Re: How stable is 4.9-RELEASE proving to be? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: zen List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 01:16:01 -0000 Hello Brett, Wednesday, October 29, 2003, 11:41:37 PM, you wrote: > We need immediate feedback on the stability of FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE. (Yes, I > know, people are just starting to download it now.) We want and need some of > the important fixes that went into -STABLE in the past month (including vital > upates to IPFW2), but can't afford to put a release that's not absolutely > solid on a production system. (For the same reason, we probably won't go to > 5.x until 5.3.) The comment in the release notes suggesting that conservative > users stick with 4.8-RELEASE is not encouraging. If 4.9 isn't stable, we may > be forced to jump over to OpenBSD 3.4 for new production systems. > Will there be a 4.9.1 if there are serious problems in 4.9? it's stable enough for me. we plant to upgrade all servers to 4.9 STABLE ASAP. -- Best regards, zen mailto:zen@tk-pttuntex.com