Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      11 Jul 2002 13:07:55 +0200
From:      Marc Recht <marc@informatik.uni-bremen.de>
To:        Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>
Cc:        Bill Huey <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org>, freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: 1.3.1 patchset 7 not quite ready
Message-ID:  <1026385676.781.30.camel@leeloo.intern.geht.de>
In-Reply-To: <15660.64672.311655.234760@emerger.yogotech.com>
References:  <20020710234814.GE2394@gnuppy.monkey.org>  <15660.64672.311655.234760@emerger.yogotech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am Do, 2002-07-11 um 05.33 schrieb Nate Williams:
> > 3) The only thing that's left is testing out the signal/exception
> > 	framework (stack yellow/red zoning). Hopefully, that won't
> > 	be completely broken.
> 
> It appears that signals may not be completely working as expected in
> -current, so you may have problems there as well.
> 
> If the only problems are userland (ie; libc_r), that's a really silly
> reason to abandon -stable for -current.
IMHO is targeting -current The Right Thing (tm). 5.0-RELEASE is not _so_
far away and it would be nice if it would come with a native (Sun
approved) binary on the CD. IMHO it would be good for the image of
FreeBSD. Some users were disappointed that it didn't come with the
latest 4.x-RELEASEs.
I don't say -stable should be abandoned, but 5.0-RELEASE should (IMHO)
be the primary target.

Marc



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1026385676.781.30.camel>