Re: Is 4.10-BETA stable?
From: Ceri Davies (ceri_at_submonkey.net)
Date: 04/22/04
- Previous message: Mike Maltese: "Re: Is 4.10-BETA stable?"
- In reply to: Dave Horsfall: "Is 4.10-BETA stable?"
- Next in thread: Dave Horsfall: "Re: Is 4.10-BETA stable?"
- Reply: Dave Horsfall: "Re: Is 4.10-BETA stable?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 11:24:42 +0100 To: Dave Horsfall <dave@horsfall.org>
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 07:58:32PM +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> I decided to take the plunge and perform my very first upgrade, from 4.7
> to (I thought) 4.9, by CVSuping RELENG_4 and "make buildworld" etc.
>
> Well, imagine my dismay when I was greeted with 4.10-BETA instead...
>
> Is this release considered stable? It isn't even mentioned on the FreeBSD
> page. Or did I stuff up, and should have used RELENG_4_9_X instead?
At the moment, 4.10-BETA == STABLE. Within the the week, this will
change to 4.10-RC1, then maybe 4.10-RC2 and finally 4.10-STABLE.
> Are there any, umm, release notes for 4.10-BETA, so I can see what I'm
> in for?
They're in src/release, but you do have STABLE. The "BETA" in 4.10-BETA
means that we're considering this code for release as 4.10-RELEASE, and
that's all.
Ceri
--
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Previous message: Mike Maltese: "Re: Is 4.10-BETA stable?"
- In reply to: Dave Horsfall: "Is 4.10-BETA stable?"
- Next in thread: Dave Horsfall: "Re: Is 4.10-BETA stable?"
- Reply: Dave Horsfall: "Re: Is 4.10-BETA stable?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
