ARRRRGH! Guys, who's breaking -STABLE's GMIRROR code?!
bkoenig at cs.tu-berlin.de
Thu Sep 14 12:02:37 PDT 2006
Vivek Khera schrieb:
> On Sep 12, 2006, at 6:23 PM, hackmiester (Hunter Fuller) wrote:
>>> -STABLE is still a development branch without guarantee of a stable
>>> and working operating system.
>> Hahahahaha... That's ironic...
> No, just misinterpretation of which attribute of the system to which
> the word "stable" applies.
Do you really think I misinterpreted the meaning of -STABLE? *I* think
most people misinterprete -STABLE because the first thing that comes to
mind is runtime stability. The same issue exists in the GNU/Debian Linux
world: Debian stable doesn't mean that the system run always rock-solid
and works perfectly, but rather the state of software is stable, i.e.
maintainers ensure 100% compatibility between updates.
More information about the freebsd-stable