*BSD News Article 51555


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!nickkral
From: nickkral@parker.EECS.Berkeley.EDU (Nick Kralevich)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Linux vs ....
Date: 16 Sep 1995 11:49:39 GMT
Organization: Electrical Engineering Computer Science Department, University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <43edkj$li6@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <41epe5$onh@mailnews.kub.nl> <41q8fl$8nt@gate.sinica.edu.tw> <1995Sep8.084248.28094@state.systems.sa.gov.au> <43cnds$c5p@ivory.lm.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: parker.eecs.berkeley.edu

In article <43cnds$c5p@ivory.lm.com>,
Peter Berger <peterb@telerama.lm.com> wrote:
>>In article <41q8fl$8nt@gate.sinica.edu.tw>, taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw (Brian Tao) writes:
>>There is absolutely no need to do it.  Almost all releases are "stable",
>>and the few that aren't are quickly replaced.  
>
>This is complete and utter bullshit.  If all releases are stable, why is
>there a new one every 8 hours?  

Why are FreeBSD people always such a**h***s?

Perhaps you are confusing kernel releases with distributions.  Sure,
new "development" kernels may be released every couple of days,
but new distributions are released over a much larger period of time.

The latest version of Slackware hasn't been updated since May 10, 1995.
The latest stable kernel hasn't been updated since Aug 2, 1995.

>I'm sure you won't have -any- problem
>explaining about the new functionality included in releases 1.1.0 through
>1.1.59 

The 1.odd.* numbers are development kernels.  The 1.even.* numbers are
release versions.  Of course there will be problems with the development
kernels!  For more stable kernels, you should stick to the 1.even.* 
series of kernels.

Take care,
-- Nick Kralevich
   nickkral@cory.eecs.berkeley.edu