In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Holloway wrote:
> Oh I completely disagree.
> Many serious orgnanizations and people concerned
> with stability work with 3.x and plan on sticking with
> 3.x until many of the serious changes to 4.0 have proven
> themselves.
>
> The gcc (2.9.x -- 3.x) compiler for example, has only just recently become
> as rock solid as the standard gcc 2.7.2.3 for freebsd 3.x
Um, yes, I would also like the compiler do move a little more
conservativly, and there is some hardware that doesn't work in 4.x,
but other than that I don't like 3.4-STABLE and don't think it is wise
to update on older 3.x release to it due to stability. See the
discussion on -stable and let us not get into the same flamewar here.
Martin
--
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Martin Cracauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/
Tel.: (private) +4940 5221829 Fax.: (private) +4940 5228536
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
