[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 18:46:10 +0000
From: Oliver Schneider <musl-mailinglist@...rot.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: musl 1.0.x branch
Hi Rich,
On 2014-06-11 13:16, Rich Felker wrote:
> For reference (I'm not sure this is published anywhere; it probably
> should be) "stable" here means "no unnecessary changes that risk
> disturbing an existing working deployment". It's not a matter of how
> reliable or bug-free the release is.
Well that's clear. Since we cannot reliably know how many defects exist
in a software project.
> My intended audience for stable is users who have fairly constant sets
> of packages built against musl and who don't want to deal with changes
> that might affect their build procedures, nonstandard or undocumented
> behaviors their programs might be relying on, etc. The release series
> from master (currently 1.1.x) on the other hand is probably a better
> choice if you're expanding your set of software built against musl,
> aiming to support a widening range of kernel versions, etc.
Indeed. Then I should probably switch to the newer release series.
Perhaps this is worth pointing out? Is there a Wiki in which one can get
edit rights so as to write these things down for future users?
With best regards,
// Oliver
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
