9.1 minimal ram requirements

[CeDeROM]

On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Kimmo Paasiala <kpaasial at gmail.com> wrote:
> If it works for 99.99% percent of the users and fails for the
> remaining miniscule percentage because they have a very peculiar
> hardware, very small amount of ram etc, should the release called
> buggy and unstable? I really don't think so.

Hey hey :-) Its rather a matter of organization, not to rush towards a
release (see "do we get 9.1 before christmas"), if there are known
issues (see security, etc). I also started to use RC myself as I found
some stuff suprising on 9.0. But when I consider someone to use
FreeBSD while there are release made before release, or rarely used
stuff added by default that takes 1000% of standard kernel RAM usage,
or similar - this does not look serious, this makes people think "i
will use linux, things like this happens there all the time but i have
more drivers", etc, etc. Even for FreeBSD enhousiast it is hard to
discuss with people on better organization of FreeBSD over Linux in
that case. From what I read there are people working hard to make a
release, but we should not rush them at cost of quality.

I am still with FreeBSD and I really like it more than Linux, this is
why I think quality is more important than bleeding-edge here :-)

Best regards :-)
Tomek

-- 
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info