Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 07:56:39 +0200 (SAT) From: John Hay <jhay@mikom.csir.co.za> To: cschuber@uumail.gov.bc.ca Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Snapshots Message-ID: <199806170556.HAA24857@zibbi.mikom.csir.co.za> In-Reply-To: <199806170108.SAA07454@cwsys.cwsent.com> from Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group at "Jun 16, 98 06:08:07 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I am currently considering switching from -stable to -current. Would > it be safe to assume that snapshots, e.g. 3.0-980520-SNAP, would be a > little more stable than any other given moment's -current? Or is a > snapshot just a point in time version of -current without regard to > potential stability? Snaps are normally built automatically, so there is two things that you can say from a snap. 1. The source was buildable/compilable at that stage and 2 nobody know how stable it will be. :-) The official -current snap machine is a bit broken at the moment. If you want a later snap (and have the patience) you can get later ones from ftp.za.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD. The machine is in South Africa so the time is GMT+2. Try to use it outside our working hours and the transfers shouldn't be THAT bad. :-) But don't expect USA rates, we only have a 576k link into the internet and it is saturated during our working hours. The last snaps should be fairly stable, we have been updateing our snap building machine every 1 or 2 days lately and the only panics I have seen was when I tried out the softupdate stuff, the rest of the time the machine is solid. (The reason for the many updates was to see if the fixes to the softupate code would help.) John -- John Hay -- John.Hay@mikom.csir.co.za To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199806170556.HAA24857>