Subject: Re: Release cycles
To: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
From: Giles Lean <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/02/1997 21:25:02
On Sat, 1 Nov 97 19:58:42 -0500 (EST) Greg A. Woods wrote:
> Unfortunately no NetBSD formal release has been truely stable, even, or
> especially, on the i386, since 0.9.
I disagree. In my usage of 1.1/i386 (which I am still running) the
only instability has been the well known swap leak, which was also in
>From my experience of years of commercial Unix releases from several
vendors NetBSD-1.1/i386 was above average. Not the best, but
definitely above average.
Certainly 1.1 has been stable enough for use as an email hub, file
server and sometime Internet gateway without me wanting to find the
time to upgrade to 1.2 or 1.2.1.
Problems that I *have* come across have not been with NetBSD core OS
software but such externally sourced programs as sendmail, bind and
For an OS that "just works", NetBSD-1.1/i386 has done very well.
P.S. Yes, I do plan to upgrade to 1.3, in part because of the good new
stuff, in part because two years is long enough to run a machine
without a good housecleaning and in part because this is the first
time that a release has co-incided with me having some time. :-)