From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 22 08:20:06 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA954A2A for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2015 08:20:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx02.qsc.de (mx02.qsc.de [213.148.130.14]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78BDED3D for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2015 08:20:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from r56.edvax.de (port-92-195-149-162.dynamic.qsc.de [92.195.149.162]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx02.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5933D27789; Sun, 22 Feb 2015 09:19:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from r56.edvax.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by r56.edvax.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id t1M8JuVg002052; Sun, 22 Feb 2015 09:19:56 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 09:19:56 +0100 From: Polytropon To: cpet Subject: Re: why would I get a segmentation fault on one system but not the other? Message-Id: <20150222091956.fd1ec914.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <390c4c0547fc27e91d28872d29aa2e04@sdf.org> References: <20150221224006.GA5501@home.parts-unknown.org> <09da5ec0816e098badc49432c802dc18@sdf.org> <390c4c0547fc27e91d28872d29aa2e04@sdf.org> Reply-To: Polytropon Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.1.1 (GTK+ 2.24.5; i386-portbld-freebsd8.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 08:20:06 -0000 On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 17:03:50 -0600, cpet wrote: > As well as don't use stable on a production box as STABLE doesn't mean > what it means. STABLE means that the API/ABI is stable. Unlike HEAD (CURRENT), STABLE still is actually _stable_ in most cases, so it's a valid solution for production systems (given that you're prepared well, and you know what you're doing). I'm running STABLE on few production machines myself (where this is needed), but I usually prefer (and often recommend) using RELEASE and add the security patches when they are available. STABLE does _not_ mean it's an experimental branch such as HEAD. In HEAD, you might experience the following things: (a) system doesn't even build (b) system builds, but crashes (c) system works perfectly fine In cases of (a) and (b), updating your sources a few hours later may turn the whole thing into case (c). Also note that a feature tested in HEAD _may_ disappear. HEAD is "filtered" to STABLE, and STABLE is "filtered" to RELEASE. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...