Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 13:29:46 -0400 From: "Troy Settle" <troy@picus.com> To: "Kris Kennaway" <kris@FreeBSD.org>, "Francisco Reyes" <fran@reyes.somos.net> Cc: "FreeBSd Chat list" <chat@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Is Stable really stable? Message-ID: <FCEELIAEIIECDGKKJLMIEEFDCAAA.troy@picus.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007122247470.74613-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-STABLE is /very/ stable. Sure, some funky stuff sneaks in once in a while, but like Kris said, it's just a matter of keeping up with the -stable mailing list and choosing your target carefully. If you miss, then reload, take aim, and try again :) ** > The recent changes in the way of making new kernels plus the ** ** Repeat after me: it's not a recent change - people just ** didn't get the ** message until it was rammed down their throats recently. I confess, I've not been keeping up with things very well, but what's changed in the way that kernels are built? I don't remember doing anything other than: cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf cp GENERIC MYKERNEL vi MYKERNEL config MYKERNEL cd ../../compile/MYKERNEL make depend all install reboot Which seems to work equally well on my 2.2.8-STABLE, 3.2-STABLE, and 4.0-STABLE boxes. I'm quite positive it was the same as far back as 2.1.5 (when I first got serious about FreeBSD). -- Troy Settle Network Analyst Picus Communications 540.633.6327 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?FCEELIAEIIECDGKKJLMIEEFDCAAA.troy>