Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 16:32:04 -0700 (MST) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: fcash@ocis.net Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Possibility for FreeBSD 4.11 Extended Support Message-ID: <20061228.163204.1187166090.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <200612221106.59985.fcash@ocis.net> References: <39AFDF50473FED469B15B6DFF2262F7A0273C975@DEHHX001.deuser.de.intra> <200612221106.59985.fcash@ocis.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <200612221106.59985.fcash@ocis.net>
Freddie Cash <fcash@ocis.net> writes:
: On Friday 22 December 2006 08:09 am, Helge.Oldach@atosorigin.com wrote:
: > Pete French <> wrote on Friday, December 22, 2006 2:44 PM:
: > Frankly, I can't follow the argument that 6.x is "unstable". After all,
: > it's named 6-STABLE for a reason. I'd say from experience that the
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: Not for the reason you think. -STABLE in FreeBSD means API/ABI stability,
: not necessarily system stability. It's a promise that a binary compiled
: on 6.0-RELEASE will run on 6.32-RELEASE without needing to recompile it
: (with very few exceptions).
It also means system stability.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061228.163204.1187166090.imp>