Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 13:45:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Youse <cyouse@cybersites.com> To: "Chad R. Larson" <chad@DCFinc.com> Cc: Justin Wolf <jjwolf@bleeding.com>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stability concerns in latest -STABLEs. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9905071344540.11179-100000@ns1.cybersites.com> In-Reply-To: <199905071710.KAA18381@freeway.dcfinc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Which, unfortunately, is one of my criteria. I need SMP for this puppy, otherwise I would agree with you and stick to 2.2-STABLE. Chuck Youse Director of Systems cyouse@cybersites.com On Fri, 7 May 1999, Chad R. Larson wrote: > 2.2 does all I need done. I'm a trailing-edge kinda guy when money > is directly involved. So, if someone were to ask me what they > should put up if their own butt was backing the uptime numbers, I'd > say, "Unless you need SMP, go with 2.2-STABLE." > > -crl > -- > Chad R. Larson (CRL15) 602-953-1392 Brother, can you paradigm? 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?Pine.BSF.4.05.9905071344540.11179-100000>