Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 11:06:59 -0800 From: Freddie Cash <fcash@ocis.net> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Possibility for FreeBSD 4.11 Extended Support Message-ID: <200612221106.59985.fcash@ocis.net> In-Reply-To: <39AFDF50473FED469B15B6DFF2262F7A0273C975@DEHHX001.deuser.de.intra> References: <39AFDF50473FED469B15B6DFF2262F7A0273C975@DEHHX001.deuser.de.intra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 22 December 2006 08:09 am, Helge.Oldach@atosorigin.com wrote: > Pete French <> wrote on Friday, December 22, 2006 2:44 PM: > Frankly, I can't follow the argument that 6.x is "unstable". After all, > it's named 6-STABLE for a reason. I'd say from experience that the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Not for the reason you think. -STABLE in FreeBSD means API/ABI stability, not necessarily system stability. It's a promise that a binary compiled on 6.0-RELEASE will run on 6.32-RELEASE without needing to recompile it (with very few exceptions). -- Freddie Cash fcash@ocis.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200612221106.59985.fcash>