Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:48:20 +0100 From: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely7.cicely.de> To: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> Cc: Mark Millard <markmi@dsl-only.net>, freebsd-arm <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>, Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely7.cicely.de>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 11.0-RC1 unsupported by ports? Message-ID: <20170125094820.GB7817@cicely7.cicely.de> In-Reply-To: <20170125083346.GU13006@home.opsec.eu> References: <20170125042413.GK85666@cicely7.cicely.de> <20170125062045.GS13006@home.opsec.eu> <20170125075459.GL85666@cicely7.cicely.de> <87BFEE93-7617-4131-832B-BE697D352E0D@dsl-only.net> <20170125083346.GU13006@home.opsec.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 09:33:46AM +0100, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi!! > > Mark wrote: > > In the run-up to a release, a number of -BETA and -RC releases may be published for testing purposes. These releases are only supported for a few weeks, as resources permit, and will not be listed as supported on this page. Users are strongly discouraged from running these releases on production systems. > > > > B) 11.0-RELEASE would have made 11.0-RC1 not be supported > > (if 11.0-RC1 was even supported for that long). > > > > C) stable/11 is supported > > > > D) head is "supported" (no complaint anyway). > > HEAD is for testing, it's not supported in the word-smithing kind of way 8-} Well, the main cause for confusion was the wording and I didn't know what exactly it triggers, plus it first happened to me on an arm based system and wasn't sure if that unsupported was related to arm. -- B.Walter <bernd@bwct.de> http://www.bwct.de Modbus/TCP Ethernet I/O Baugruppen, ARM basierte FreeBSD Rechner uvm.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170125094820.GB7817>