ULE status

[Mike]

I compiled my kernel with ULE this morning on my AMD64 workstation to help 
test. All seems good so far. Anything in particular to keep an eye on?

-Mike


On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Michael Nottebrock wrote:

> On Tuesday, 8. February 2005 14:02, Mipam wrote:
>
>> Okay clear, but the fact that it's in 5-stable suggests the it's stable to
>> use, else why would it be in 5-stable.
>
> The changes that have been merged to stable have been tested for some time in
> 6-CURRENT, so they're not completely experimental, yes.
>
>> Maybe i'm completly wrong in this interpretation?
>
> I'm not sure what your interpretation is. If you go by your own definition
> (what's in -stable should be safe to use), why do you ask at all? In any
> case, the ULE MFC commits are only a few days old, so there's naturally not
> much feedback available, good or bad. If you want to play it safe, wait a
> week or a month and monitor this lists for complaints before trying it
> yourself.
>
> -- 
>   ,_,   | Michael Nottebrock               | lofi at freebsd.org
> (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve     | http://www.freebsd.org
>   \u/   | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org
>



--------------------------------------
"Hard Work Often Pays Off After Time,
  but Laziness Always Pays Off Now."