From xemacs-m  Wed Jan 22 09:22:20 1997
Received: from steadfast.teradyne.com (steadfast.teradyne.com [131.101.1.200])
          by xemacs.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id JAA06512 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 09:22:19 -0600 (CST)
Received: from kiki.icd.teradyne.com (kiki.icd.teradyne.com [131.101.1.30]) by steadfast.teradyne.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id KAA19543 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:25:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: from spacely.icd.teradyne.com (spacely.icd.teradyne.com [131.101.10.9]) by kiki.icd.teradyne.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA10704 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:19:38 -0500 (EST)
Received: from spacely by spacely.icd.teradyne.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id KAA01276; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:22:01 -0500
Message-Id: <199701221522.KAA01276@spacely.icd.teradyne.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0beta 12/23/96
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: 20.0 release schedule 
In-reply-to: neal's message of 22 Jan 1997 09:47:03 -0500.
	     <u94tg922e0.fsf@neal.ctd.comsat.com> 
reply-to: acs@acm.org
X-Attribution: Vin
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:22:01 -0500
From: Vinnie Shelton  <shelton@icd.teradyne.com>


neal@ctd.comsat.com said:
> Really?  Am I the only one who finds 20.0 to be much less stable than
> 19.4?  19.4 has been extremely reliable - the best xemacs ever.  I
> stopped using 20.0 for daily work because of various problems and
> crashes. 

20.0 --with-mule=no works very well for me on Solaris 2.5. I've been using 
it nearly exclusively for a couple of weeks.  At its release, 19.14 worked
fine on Solaris, but dumped core under SunOS.  Of course, those problems 
have since been ironed out.  YMMV, but I expect the 20.0 release to be more 
stable than the 19.14 release was.

--vin

