Mark Linimon wrote:
From a ports standpoint: absolutely not.
We are currently trying to support 4 major CVS branches. Although we still
have some dedicated committers who are trying to keep the Ports Collection
running on 4.X, they are falling further and further behind, especially as
the rate
hree
months after 6.3-RELEASE is worse but still acceptable.
It's my $0.02
Dan
P.S. Please note the english isn't my native language.
--
Dan Lukes SISAL MFF UK
AKA: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EM
to a broken
air-conditioner), I have now moved on.
I'm also preparing to transition, but it's first time I'm changing
better version and thinking I'm upgrading to worse system than previous
Despite of anything I sayd, we should thank for the whole team for it's
Doug Barton wrote:
The main problem is - 6.x is still not competitive replacement for
4.x. I'm NOT speaking about old unsupported hardware - I speaked about
performance in some situation and believe in it's stability.
I think saying that it's a worse replacement is a bit too broad.
Danial Thom wrote:
The right thing to do is to port the SATA support
and new NIC support back to 4.x and support both.
4.x is far superior on a Uniprocessor system and
FreeBSD-5+ may be an entire re-write away from
ever being any good at MP. Come to terms with it,
PLEASE, because it is the case a
mitting PR. MFC is not automatic even for RELENG_6 branch ...
You should know that best supported branch of FreeBSD is HEAD ... ;-)
Dan
--
Dan Lukes SISAL MFF UK
AKA: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL
