CLARITY re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3

[Peter Jeremy]

On 2008-Jun-08 17:49:20 +0200, Michel Talon <talon at lpthe.jussieu.fr> wrote:
>and it is now working perfectly well without any trouble. The only
>"gotcha" is the slowness of X problem when compiling, but i live with that.

Have you tried SCHED_ULE?  In my experience, it does a better job of
scdeduling than SCHED_4BSD, even on UP machines (YMMV).

>which are perhaps susceptible of destabilising it. Personnally i have
>seen the same occurring with 6.0, 5.0 and 4.*, for me the last releases
>of the 4.* were very poor on my laptop while the early 4.* releases were
>perfectly OK.  

The difficulty with the later 4.x releases was that there were major
differences between the 4.x and later kernels and this made it
increasingly difficult to backport bugfixes.  This is less of an issue
with now 4.x is out of the way.

-- 
Peter Jeremy
Please excuse any delays as the result of my ISP's inability to implement
an MTA that is either RFC2821-compliant or matches their claimed behaviour.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20080608/6d80a443/attachment.pgp