From owner-freebsd-questions  Tue Aug 26 07:33:17 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id HAA13594
          for questions-outgoing; Tue, 26 Aug 1997 07:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu (csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu [152.1.88.3])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA13568
          for <questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 1997 07:33:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: rdkeys@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu
Received: by csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu (5.61-AIX-1.2/1.0)
	id AA133031 (for questions@freebsd.org, from rdkeys/rdkeys@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu); Tue, 26 Aug 97 10:42:26 -0400
Message-Id: <9708261442.AA133031@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu>
Subject: Re: 2.2-STABLE ---THANKS for the detailed info!
To: softweyr@xmission.com (Wes Peters)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 10:42:24 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: rdkeys@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu (), questions@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199708260516.XAA22495@obie.softweyr.ml.org> from "Wes Peters" at Aug 25, 97 11:16:41 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Some of
> us even have older, slower hardware than the core team.  ;^)  (This
> message is being chiseled into the electrons on a 486/66, for instance.)

Well, this dummy's boxes are half a dozen lowendian 386/486 junkers, and
I really can't complain, at all, since 2.1.7.1/2.2.x/3.0.x is up and
running fine on all of them.  What I was after was a rock stable unchanging
system for the home boxes (2.1.7.1 is fine there), a good carefree system
for the office boxes (2.2-RELENG is fine there) and one 3.0 play box
(current is fine there).  Your detailed explanation helped immensely.
What was confusing me was what the 2.2 stable actually was.

> (Yes, this is a mild slam directed at Linux, the various SVR4 PC
> platforms, and especially SCO.)

I run aix/minix/linux/FreeBSd, and support your slam, although there
is one source that I can compile fine on suns/aix/linux but it blows up
every gcc on every version of FreeBSD (runs fine on gcc on the sun and the
linux box, tho).  I am still scratching my head on that one.  Krazy parsing
error with no evident code anomalies.

> We also have a 2.2-STABLE release, based on post-2.2.2 code, which
> is approaching this level of reliability and features the performance
> and system administration pluses found in the 2.2 release.

Where does one start the build of this?  I would assume it is built
on the 2.2.2-RELEASE and cvsup the stable tag?

> That's the nice thing about FreeBSD: you make the choice which is most
> appropriate for you.  Hopefully now you have enough information to make
> a good decision.

Yes, I like the choice, but for a while it was quite confusing to find
out what exactly was stable and what was almost stable and what was
release and what was development.  Now it is quite clear....  Thanks!

> Wes Peters

Thanks Wes..... Bob Keys  rdkeys@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu
                le unix dummie, par excellance.