Subject: Re: Corrupted 20011221-1.5ZA Snapshot
To: Curt Sampson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Nathan J. Williams <email@example.com>
Date: 02/28/2002 20:55:53
Curt Sampson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Stephen M Jones wrote:
> > There is something I've not seen from everyone else .. isn't 1.5ZA
> > considered experimental??
> Well, yes, of course. But as I've posted before, there's "experimental,"
> and there's "known to be seriously broken." :-) Problems with
> drivers and the like I consider to be standard bad luck; it could
> happen to any system. It was the known corruption that there was
> no notice of in the notes for that snapshot that really annoyed me.
The 1.5ZA snapshot you used was in a subdirectory of the alpha
snapshots directory called "pending.untested" (You never mentioned
i.e. you should have assumed that it was even less usable than an
For not doing so, and for inflicting the untested snapshot on a
customer, when there were older snapshots, you are a disgrace.