Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 12 May 2006 08:06:52 -0600
From:      Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
To:        Chris <chrcoluk@gmail.com>
Cc:        Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD 6.1 Released
Message-ID:  <4464967C.50707@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <3aaaa3a0605120553i2ccc0b6es8901e15a5ab83318@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <44600A42.7030600@samsco.org> <44601F4A.9070802@elischer.org>	<446021DE.6040507@rogers.com> <20060511210912.GA1344@zaphod.nitro.dk>	<4463DC96.70908@rogers.com> <446402BB.7050201@alumni.rice.edu>	<44640422.1000006@rogers.com> <m3vesbpsne.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> <3aaaa3a0605120553i2ccc0b6es8901e15a5ab83318@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chris wrote:

> On 12/05/06, Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> Mike Jakubik <mikej@rogers.com> writes:
>>
>> > Jonathan Noack wrote:
>> >> The *entire* errata page was from 6.0; it was a mistake.  This wasn't
>> >> some "put on the rose-colored classes and gloss over major issues"
>> >> thing.  It was a long release cycle and something was forgotten.  
>> C'est
>> >> la vie.  It's always a good idea to check the most up-to-date 
>> version of
>> >> the errata page on the web anyway, so it's *not* too late to update 
>> it.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > How convenient. These problems needed to be addressed in the release
>> > notes, not some on line version.
>>
>> You lost connection to the ground, Mike. Come back please :-)
>>
>> People make mistakes, and that applies to both the code as to the
>> documentation, and users will know that sometimes problems will be found
>> only after the release so they'll check online later when running into a
>> problem.  The 6.1 release announcement already mentioned the errata
>> lapsus BTW and asked people to check on-line, so it appears someone's
>> asking for perfection -- but it was decided months ago to stick to a
>> schedule rather than making perfect releases.
>>
>> Having said that, 6.1 is a real and visible improvement over 6.0 for me.
>> 6.1 is usable, where 6.0 toppled over every few minutes (I'm talking
>> about ral(4) and other nasty stuff such as tmpfs/mdmfs panics in 6.0 -
>> ral(4) is what prompted me to do the 5.4->6.0 upgrade).
>>
>> -- 
>> Matthias Andree
> 
> 
> agreed whilst 6.1 isnt bug free lets not forget its a massive
> improvement over 6.0 in terms of stability, I still havent seen a
> lockup/crash on any of my 6.1 servers and they are all prerelease.
> 
> It did shock me tho they didnt simply repackage the 6.1 release with
> updated errata notes it will look amatuerish to have outdated notes in
> the package.
> 
> Chris

We didn't discover it until the last minute, and repackaging takes 3
days.

Scott





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4464967C.50707>