> On 2004-08-23 16:21, Danny Braniss <danny_at_cs.huji.ac.il> wrote: > > > On 2004-08-23 10:46, Danny Braniss <danny_at_cs.huji.ac.il> wrote: > > > > shouldn't > > > > NOTE TO PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT FreeBSD 5.x IS SLOW: > > > > now be 6.x ... > > > > > > Would something like this seem ok to you? It only mentions FreeBSD-CURRENT > > > instead of a specific version, so it will also work for FreeBSD 7.X when > > > that comes along. > > > > fine, but what if FreeBSD 7.X is actually faster ... :-) > > The word "slower" refers to the reduced speed of a system that runs with > a lot of debugging/test options enabled. The relative speed of the > release to the previous is (probably) of lesser importance for this > particular quote. > i agree, it's that once you take out the 'milestone', it might just become superflous, on the other hand 5.x is bad, so just current is fine - one less thing to check for.Received on Mon Aug 23 2004 - 11:48:27 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:07 UTC