Current CVS release stable enough?

xanni123 at koevis.demon.nl xanni123 at koevis.demon.nl
Tue Mar 30 21:33:43 PST 2004


> On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:29:11 -0800 (PST)
> Tushar Teredesai <linux_from_scratch at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > Matthew Burgess wrote:
> > 
> > >On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 23:44:43 +0200
> > >Jeroen Coumans <jeroen at linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
> > >  
> > >
> > >>Joel Miller said the following on 03/30/04 23:31:
> > >>    
> > >>
> > >>>>Can you
> > >>>>make an estimate when the next STABLE or PRE version is comming?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>        
> > >>>>
> > >>>This is out of the scope of this list. Please repost to lfs-dev.
> > >>>      
> > >>>
> > >>Please don't. I've answered this question at least three times
> > >>    
> > >>
> > >
> > >Candidate for the FAQ then Jeroen? :)
> > >  
> > >
> > I don't think so. Its pretty much common sense:-)
> 
> Yeah, sorry.  When I read the original chain of repsonses I thought that
> Jeroen's comment was regarding "which version of the book should I
> translate".  Now that I've reread it I see what you mean :)  I of
> course agree, all questions along the lines of "should I follow
> stable/PRE/CVS" should go to /dev/null and the customary cluebat
> should be wielded.  If people don't know the difference between those
> different version/release types then they really shouldn't be compiling
> from source should they :)
> 
> Matt.

Im sorry I keep asking the same questions and I wont do it again. Sorry. I will just
wait...

Xanni




More information about the lfs-support mailing list