In a message dated 10/11/04 7:02:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I hope you're not betting your business on these questions, because
> the reality is that 1) they're not very good questions and 2) the
> people who are answering them can't really know the answers.
> "stable
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:20:40 EDT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 10/9/04 6:25:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >> 1. By Sep 2005, do you think 5.x performance will be optimized
> >and be > comparable to today's 4.x stable versions ?
>
> >5.3 is supposed to
ner-freebsd-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 8:21 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Release Question
>
> In a message dated 10/9/04 6:25:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >> 1.
In a message dated 10/9/04 6:25:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> 1. By Sep 2005, do you think 5.x performance will be optimized and be
>> comparable to today's 4.x stable versions ?
>5.3 is supposed to be stable, and it's expected to be on part with 4.x
performance, and
Vulpes Velox wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:07:00 -0700
Balakumar Velmurugan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
We are starting development on a new project that would go
production in the fall of 2005. I have been evaluating Release 4.x
and 5.x branches for the suitability. Our target platform
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:07:00 -0700
Balakumar Velmurugan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> We are starting development on a new project that would go
> production in the fall of 2005. I have been evaluating Release 4.x
> and 5.x branches for the suitability. Our target platform is AMD64
> an
Balakumar Velmurugan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> We are starting development on a new project that would go
> production in the fall of 2005. I have been evaluating Release 4.x and
> 5.x branches for the suitability. Our target platform is AMD64 and AMD32
> uni-processor systems. We