Re: squeeze kfreebsd-8

To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
Cc: debian-bsd <debian-bsd@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: squeeze kfreebsd-8
From: Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 11:27:23 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] CAOfDtXMCAGLGNiEk51x4_3wc6zd25YwKRwXbeagSptLNV48oKw@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] alpine.GSO.1.10.1107102025240.6818@multics.mit.edu>
References: <[🔎] CAOfDtXO7Y6G-W6-FZCs4n3-aGpGM0vSep0TX+WHKkWCD5skuUA@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] alpine.GSO.1.10.1107102025240.6818@multics.mit.edu>

2011/7/11 Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>:
>> Dragging 8.2 userland with it would be a bad idea IMHO.  What do you
>> think?
>
> Why do you think it would be a bad idea?  Just for the churn factor, or are
> there other expectations of stability?

Yes, different expectations.  A Debian stable release usually doesn't
update anything except security fixes or critical bugs.  However,
Debian GNU/kFreeBSD has a special "technology preview" status, that's
why I was asking.

I agree with Petr it's better to use backports, this give users more
choices (stay with 8.1 vs install 8.2 backport).

-- 
Robert Millan

Reply to:

References:
- squeeze kfreebsd-8
  - From: Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org>
- Re: squeeze kfreebsd-8
  - From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU>

Prev by Date: Re: squeeze kfreebsd-8
Next by Date: Re: squeeze kfreebsd-8
Previous by thread: Re: squeeze kfreebsd-8
Next by thread: Re: squeeze kfreebsd-8
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread