Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 22:20:58 -0500 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com> To: Kenneth Wayne Culver <culverk@wam.umd.edu> Cc: Omachonu Ogali <oogali@intranova.net>, Brennan W Stehling <brennan@offwhite.net>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 5.0 already? Message-ID: <20000513222058.A5564@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0005131433150.121-100000@rac5.wam.umd.edu>; from "Kenneth Wayne Culver" on Sat May 13 14:35:34 GMT 2000 References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10005130735370.20100-100000@hydrant.intranova.net> <Pine.GSO.4.21.0005131433150.121-100000@rac5.wam.umd.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (May 13), Kenneth Wayne Culver said: > Alright, this is how it works. 3.x-STABLE is STILL the only TRUELY > Stable tree. the x.0 releases are meant to be releases which iron > some stuff out, and when the x.1 release comes out, that is when the > tree becomes -STABLE. Actually, 4.0 is without a doubt FreeBSD's most stable point-0 release ever, and probably (definitely, wrt NFS) more stable than 3.4. I've been running 4.* on 4 production machines at work and have had only one crash in the last 6 months between them. As for the "sudden" jump to 5.0 for -current, the decision was made when 3.0 was created to not do any more multiple-point releases (like 2.2.8 or god forbid 2.1.7.1 :) anymore. When -current gets ready for release, the major version number gets bumped. Take a look at /usr/share/misc/bsd-family-tree, and watch the far-left-hand branch to see what I mean. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@emsphone.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000513222058.A5564>