From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jun 5 04:02:35 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id EAA18753 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Jun 1995 04:02:35 -0700 Received: from localhost.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id EAA18744 ; Mon, 5 Jun 1995 04:02:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.cdrom.com: Host localhost.cdrom.com didn't use HELO protocol To: Joe Greco cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 2.0.5-A: Very disheartening? In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 05 Jun 95 04:55:33 CDT." <199506050955.EAA06438@brasil.moneng.mei.com> Date: Mon, 05 Jun 1995 04:02:33 -0700 Message-ID: <18743.802350153@freefall.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > Jordan, it does seem like there's something that's not quite kosher with > 2.0.5-A, and it has nothing to do with the floppies, as far as I can tell. > I now have two systems that are definitely unstable - two entirely different > types of systems, at that - and both have run earlier revisions of FreeBSD 2 > and taken heavy poundings with relative grace for over half a year now. I respect that you are having this problem and never intended to belittle it. It think you truly read far more into my little off-the-cuff comment than was there! Also try to respect that we can only try to fix what we can repeat, and if we are unable to test a certain failure mode on the hardware WE have available, then by the only definition we know of (what we can see and feel) the OS is "ready for release." Now 2.0.5R, as it were, may be more than a bit green still and I'm certainly working overtime on it. We all want to get it out the door though, and if there should come a point where we're pretty happy with the general install and are getting lots of _success_ stories back, then we may very well release it even with your machines still in a twist! I'm sorry, but that's life! If a previous release runs on them then that's great! By all means, continue to run what works until such time as we can diagnose and fix the problem in the main line (which we'll certainly try to do!), but don't dictate to me that the release can't possible go out until Your Specific Problem is fixed! Can you imagine if I listened to every single user who said that? The release would _never_ happen, that's what! Honestly, sometimes it gets *me* just a little pissed at what people often seem to demand for free! Now let's end this conversation (at least at this tone) before we all go wasting a lot of time and energy that would be far better applied elsewhere. I have no trouble discussing further ALPHA test goals with you, and we can keep the "business tone" of our conversations emotionless and precise if that would be less likely to inadvertantly cause you distress in the future. I don't particularly care either way right now, it's entirely up to you. I have only one goal: To get 2.0.5R into the best possible shape and release it. If you'd like to help further in this process, then welcome! All help sincerely appreciated! Jordan