August 31st, 2003, 15:09
In http://openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html it says the following:
"There are times where "normal" users may wish to live on the cutting edge and run -current. The most common reason is that the user has a device which is not supported by -release (and thus, not -stable)"

Does it mean "which is not supported by -stable (and thus, not -release)"? If it does, woohoo, found a bug :D

August 31st, 2003, 19:26
Either way works. -stable won't have new drivers in it, so nothing new is supported in -stable that wasn't also in -release.

August 31st, 2003, 21:32
Yeah, but it's still backwards :D

Former Member
August 31st, 2003, 21:38
It doesn't sound backwards. release would be the current release... whereas stable will be proven stable, anything not found in release will not be found in stable because release would be current.

works both ways though, as frisco mentioned

August 31st, 2003, 21:40
You got it wrong, -release is older then -stable

Former Member
August 31st, 2003, 21:41
ahhh that makes no sense... :oops:

August 31st, 2003, 21:42
It's because -release is stuff like 3.3, but -stable is 3.3 plus security and stability patches... and -curent is.... suicide :lol:

Former Member
August 31st, 2003, 21:46
yea I've seen the diagram....
Only security patches and other patches for stability are added to stable, so there will not be any change in supported devices, only in stability or security. frisco basically said that though, it's still the right way round :P

August 31st, 2003, 21:53
Yeah I see his point now, but I was just hoping :)