*BSD News Article 60844


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!inquo!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!root
From: kargl@troutmask.apl.washington.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: FreeBSD-stable?
Date: 7 Feb 1996 18:41:52 GMT
Organization: Applied Phyics Lab
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <4farpg$a2p@nntp5.u.washington.edu>
References: <4f9cb6$etp@nntp5.u.washington.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: troutmask.apl.washington.edu

     Craig Johnston wrote in article <4f9cb6$etp@nntp5.u.washington.edu> :
>
>Ok.. there's a FAQ on -current but I was unable to find anything on
>-stable. (please hit me in the head with something heavy and blunt if
>I missed it.)
>
>I assume -stable is 2.1.0-release with bugfixes, i.e. more stable than
>2.1.0?

Yes, that is essentially correct.  There are a few new features that are
deemed stable.

>Is it possible to get a list somewhere of the differences between
>-release and -stable?

Not very easily.  You might be able to look at the CVS commit logs, but
I haven't tried.  I suggest subscribing to the freebsd-stable mailing
list.  There isn't much traffic.


> May one run a -stable kernel with the rest of
>a -release source tree without horrible things happening?  

It depends!  I am running a -stable system with a -release kernel.
The kernel that I built with -stable sources is very UNSTABLE.  I can
get this kernel to either panic or indefinitely hang within minutes
of booting.

>
>Thanks in advance for enlightenment, either via answer or blunt object.
>
>-- 
>Craig Johnston -- caj@tower.stc.housing.washington.edu
>
Steven G. Kargl     | Phone: 206-685-4677 |
Applied Physics Lab | Fax:   206-543-6785 |
Univ. of Washington |---------------------|
1013 NE 40th St     | FreeBSD 2.x-STABLE  |
Seattle, WA 98105   |---------------------|