*BSD News Article 91148


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.uio.no!newsfeed.nacamar.de!fu-berlin.de!irz401!orion.sax.de!uriah.heep!news
From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Why choose 2.1.7 ??
Date: 15 Mar 1997 22:29:11 GMT
Organization: Private BSD site, Dresden
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <5gf7rn$p8@uriah.heep.sax.de>
References: <01bc310c$e9177b10$214f96cd@reality>
Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch)
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.heep.sax.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.6
X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669
X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F  93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:37122

"Kurt Schafer" <kschafer@cyberbeach.net> wrote:

> Currently, it appears that there are three branches for FreeBSD
> developement, namely the 2.1 branch, the 3.0 branch and the various 2.2
> offerings.

3.0 ain't actually a branch, it's the head of the development.  Since
the kid was in need of a name that could appear in uname, it's been
called 3.0, denoting the goal rather than stating something that does
already exist.

2.1 and 2.2 are indeed branches.

> When released, will there be any significant reasons for choosing 2.1.7
> over 2.2 ?

Stability probably.  Although many people were already running 2.2
snapshots, it hasn't been tested on such a variety of machines as the
2.1 systems yet.  But that's something you will probably only value if
you are running an ISP, or some other service that pushes the system
fairly hard.  The price you gotta pay for this is a system that is
more than one year behind of the actual development, feature-wise.
Look at the 2.2 RELNOTES file to see what this means.

We expect 2.2 to become the `-stable' branch when 2.2R is released.
We have already been declaring the 2.1 branch dead for so many times
that we don't do it anymore. :-)

> And how about 3.0 ? I've loaded up a few snapshots and it seems great. Is
> there an estimated release date on that ?

We are always great in estimates.  How many of them do you want? :-))

``late summer 1997''  (for the northern hemisphere, that it is ;)

-- 
cheers, J"org

joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)