The solution in this case, it would make a next version.
Zantgo
El 19-10-2011, a las 22:05, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
escribió:
> On 2011-10-18 16:29, Zantgo wrote:
>> but I read everywhere that patched systems are unstable.
>>
>> PD: is the same-that-STABLE RELEASE, because I mean-CURRENT vs.-REL
On 2011-10-18 16:29, Zantgo wrote:
but I read everywhere that patched systems are unstable.
PD: is the same-that-STABLE RELEASE, because I mean-CURRENT vs.-RELEASE because
I have the 4.9 release
Zantgo
Define "everywhere".
A system with no patches, probably has unfixed bugs/holes. One with
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 04:29:12PM -0300, Zantgo wrote:
> but I read everywhere that patched systems are unstable.
Can you go troll elsewhere ?
Or go play in front of the bus ?
Please.
but I read everywhere that patched systems are unstable.
PD: is the same-that-STABLE RELEASE, because I mean-CURRENT vs.-RELEASE because
I have the 4.9 release
Zantgo
El 18-10-2011, a las 16:18, Mark Solocinski escribió:
> On 18.10.2011 13:11, Zantgo wrote:
>> What is more stable, use the bra
Its in the name ;)
On Oct 18, 2011 8:13 PM, "Zantgo" wrote:
> What is more stable, use the branch -CURRENT or use the branch STABLE
> (RELEASE) patched?
>
> Zantgo
>
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 01:18:19PM -0600, Mark Solocinski wrote:
> On 18.10.2011 13:11, Zantgo wrote:
> >What is more stable, use the branch -CURRENT or use the branch STABLE
> >(RELEASE) patched?
> >
> >Zantgo
>
> Probably -STABLE since -CURRENT is such a moving target.
Here we get into discussi
On 18.10.2011 13:11, Zantgo wrote:
What is more stable, use the branch -CURRENT or use the branch STABLE
(RELEASE) patched?
Zantgo
Probably -STABLE since -CURRENT is such a moving target.