From owner-freebsd-alpha Wed Mar 17 1:58:40 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34FDF14EA7 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 01:58:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA62461; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 01:59:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) To: Steve Sizemore Cc: alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Which version to run In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 15 Mar 1999 10:07:53 PST." <19990315100753.A87394@cmpharm.ucsf.edu> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 01:59:00 -0800 Message-ID: <62436.921664740@zippy.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > install, I had to use a 4.0 snapshot. However, I'd really rather > track stable (since that's what I use on my intel machines), if that > is possible. Is 3.1 stable really stable for the alpha platform, or > do I need to use current? It might be better to track -current just for a little while, at least until 3.1-stable catches up for the alpha. I don't think it's actually diverged all that much at all; Doug? - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message