Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 09:23:46 +0200 (CEST) From: Nick Hibma <nick.hibma@jrc.it> To: Frode Vatvedt Fjeld <frodef@acm.org> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: lnc0: broke for us between 3.1 and 4.0? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.990423092248.10665A-100000@elpc36.jrc.it> In-Reply-To: <2h3e1rbydz.fsf@dslab7.cs.uit.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> And does this all mean that if I want my kernel source tree to be > consistent more often than not (and any errors be fixed as soon as > possible), I'd be better off switching from -stable to -current? Yes and no. Stable will give you a broken tree less often. But people in Current have a habit of fixing things first in Current :-) The ideal combination: Running stable and keeping track of current, backporting whatever you think is of use to you. Nick 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?Pine.BSF.3.96.990423092248.10665A-100000>