From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 6 12:39:50 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBB8416A41F for ; Sat, 6 Aug 2005 12:39:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jfarmer@goldsword.com) Received: from audi.websitewelcome.com (audi.websitewelcome.com [67.19.210.130]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 925D243D45 for ; Sat, 6 Aug 2005 12:39:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jfarmer@goldsword.com) Received: from adsl-065-013-105-239.sip.tys.bellsouth.net ([65.13.105.239]:3070 helo=[192.168.1.33]) by audi.websitewelcome.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.50) id 1E1Nxq-0008I8-Id for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Sat, 06 Aug 2005 07:39:46 -0500 Message-ID: <42F4AFC0.8010907@goldsword.com> Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2005 08:40:32 -0400 From: "J. T. Farmer" Organization: GoldSword Systems User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050414 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <20050806035132.BB14A5D07@ptavv.es.net> In-Reply-To: <20050806035132.BB14A5D07@ptavv.es.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - audi.websitewelcome.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - goldsword.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6.0-BETA2 Available X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2005 12:39:51 -0000 Kevin Oberman wrote: >I would suggest that it would have been better to post to current as 6.0 >is not yet stable and most of the people who deal with problems are much >more likely to see problems reported there. > > Ok, so I'm a bit confused. The answer given for the the DMA_WRITE and DMA_READ errors experienced under 5.4 with PATA and SATA is to try 6.0. If 6.0 is not considered Stable, what are we supposed to do if we want to run Stable? John ---------------------------------------------------------------------- John T. Farmer Owner & CTO GoldSword Systems jfarmer@goldsword.com 865-691-6498 Knoxville TN Consulting, Design, & Development of Networks & Software