Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 11:27:02 -0500 (EST) From: "Bruce M. Walter" <walter@fortean.com> To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Subject: 3.1/4.0, the alpha, and a dog named blue... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.990220110616.13370B-100000@callisto.fortean.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello all, I've been running FreeBSD on several alpha's now for about two months. I'm elated that I no longer have to kiss the arse of the Linux god to get useful CPU cycles out of these machines. Thanks all for the hard work and a hearty job well-done the the alpha porters. I realized I may get flamed for asking something like this, but since I honestly don't know, I'm gonna ask: Where should a person looking to get relatively stable (read -stable ;) performance from an alpha be? I know the answer may still be 'not on FreeBSD' at this point, but I've been very impressed with the stability of the last few snaps. I'm really wondering whether new bug-fixes/enhancements/functionality in the alpha stuff is finding it's way back into the -stable branch, as all of the latest snap's are from -current which has had some ffs/vm related problems of late. If it's just a matter of taking the last 3.x alpha snap and tracking -stable via CVS that's fine, it's just not apparent that that's the "Right Thing to Do" (tm). Cheers all and thanks for the guidance! - Bruce ______________________ Bruce M. Walter, Principal NIXdesign Group Inc. 426 S. Dawson Street Raleigh NC 27601 USA 919.829.4901 Tel 919.829.4993 Fax http://www.nixdesign.com Visual communications | concept + code To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.990220110616.13370B-100000>