Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 21 Jul 2001 11:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Lamont Granquist <lamont@scriptkiddie.org>
To:        "A. L. Meyers" <a.l.meyers@consult-meyers.com>
Cc:        <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: is "stable" "stable"?
Message-ID:  <20010721111339.B75328-100000@coredump.scriptkiddie.org>
In-Reply-To: <20010721182504.L857-100000@nomad.consult-meyers.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, A. L. Meyers wrote:
> Having followed the postings here for a few weeks it seems, at
> least occasionally, that "stable" appears to be a bit less than
> "stable".

You are doing a CVS checkout of a source tree that is getting updates
on a daily basis.  If you have ever done this in a development environment
before, you should know that absolute 100% stability in any such an
environment is never, ever going to happen.

If you want the latest -stable sources which *are* stable, then you
really need to checkout sources on a fresh machine, build your
distribution and spend a few days regression testing the features of the
OS which are important to you.  You should then roll out the build to
your staging platform and give it at least a week or two.  Following that
you should put it in the load balancing rotation on your production site,
and then gradually phase it in as you gain more confidence.

Which, of course, you should be doing anyway.

If you want better stability, then checkout the actual 4.x releases with
the security fixes.  Those have actually been frozen and then bugfixed for
stability.  They should be better.

Why is this so difficult for people to understand?  *ANY* time you are
checking out the head of a development branch (even one where developers
are supposedly being "more careful") then you should expect to
occasionally see problems.  People will break the build.  People will have
insufficiently tested their code and subsystems will break.  I guarantee
you that none of the FBSD developers have a sufficient testing matrix to
*ensure* that the changes which are checked into the top of the tree will
run on every platform out there (consider for a moment just how big the
x86 testing matrix is).  I'm pretty damned impressed that -stable works as
well as it does (kudos for the developers).


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010721111339.B75328-100000>