Subject: Re: head stable?
To: Garrett D'Amore <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Geert Hendrickx <ghen@NetBSD.org>
Date: 06/14/2006 07:45:00
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:04:22PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> There are issues with gcc4 still probably, but you aren't obligated to
> use it. AFAIK, no port has officially switched to gcc4 yet.
> That said, there has been a lot of activity on HEAD recently. gcc
> 3.3.6, timecounters, sendmail removal, and kauth have all gone in
> recently. I don't think any of these have gone entirely without
> hitches, but you wouldn't expect that, would you? I wouldn't
> necessarily recommend upgrading a production to -current now, but that's
> the nature of -current, isn't it?
That's why I once proposed to periodically (well...) mark a "known to be
usable" tag on -HEAD, like DragonFly does (they call it a "preview
release"). I too am planning to deploy a somewhat-production system on
NetBSD-current (because I want some of the features), but I would prefer
a stable snapshot if I knew there was one.
> OTOH, there is the netbsd-3 branch which should be a lot more stable.
> IIUC, we're about ready to tag a 3.0.1 branch.