Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 00:24:49 +0200 (MET DST) From: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at> To: emulation@freebsd.org Cc: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@scc.nl>, Soren Schmidt <sos@freebsd.dk> Subject: Re: [emulation] Bug in linux fcntl syscall? Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.9906190017020.28961-100000@alphard.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> In-Reply-To: <3768AF3D.88607061@scc.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ Sorry for the bounce, Marcel, but your mail server is listed by ORBS. ] On Thu, 17 Jun 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: >> In general, in which direction is Linux emulation headed? > Ahead, of course :-) > But seriously, what do you mean exactly? > [...] > Currently, Linux emulation is identical for -stable and -current (as far as > I can see it). I can't remember any major changes in -current. If a change > is generally "good" then it shall probably also be applied to -stable as > well (if at all possible, of course). This is exactly what I meant! ;-) Sorry for not being clear enough. > The best thing you can do is to track -stable. That way you'll get the > best of emulation and stability. Great. What I was worrying about is having to choose between -STABLE/-RELASE for stability and -CURRENT for the best Linux emulation both of which are required by my users. As far as I remember, before 3.0 this was a serious problem. > As for the linux-base and linux-devel ports. I'd like to follow the RH > releases with a couple of weeks/months between the RH release and the > ports update. Especially for linux-base tracking these within a couple of weeks would be great. Thanks for your ongoing efforts! Gerald -- Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-emulation" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.9906190017020.28961-100000>