From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Mar 26 17:41:43 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from alpha.comkey.com.au (alpha.comkey.com.au [203.9.152.215]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F10B815170 for ; Fri, 26 Mar 1999 17:41:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gjb@comkey.com.au) Received: (qmail 7285 invoked by uid 1001); 27 Mar 1999 01:41:17 -0000 Message-ID: <19990327014117.7284.qmail@alpha.comkey.com.au> X-Posted-By: GBA-Post 1.04 06-Feb-1999 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 5A91 6942 8CEA 9DAB B95B C249 1CE1 493B 2B5A CE30 Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 11:41:17 +1000 From: Greg Black To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Any success stories with FreeBSD-3.1-Release? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I've seen quite a lot of stories on this list over the past few weeks detailing problems with FreeBSD-3.1-Release. Some of them are clearly pilot error, but some of them seem to be possibly more than that. There has been little clarification, however, from people with solutions or success stories. Now that my 3.1 CDs have finally arrived, I've been looking at them, wondering if I'm going to shoot myself in the foot if I ditch my nice stable 2.2.8 installations for 3.1 or if I'd be better off to wait for 3.2. What I'd really like to hear are stories from people who have been using 2.2.8 happily and are now happily running 3.1-Release (not -stable and not -current) if there are such people out there. If there are people who installed 3.1-release and were bitten by it but who are now happily running 3.1-stable, I'd like to hear from them too. I'd be happy for people to reply directly to me, since this question could provoke a lot of hot air for those who aren't interested (multiplied by 2 if those @!#?*%+ duplicates keep coming). If there's interest, I'll summarise the responses to the list in a little while. -- Greg Black To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message