Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 08:22:15 +0000 (GMT) From: Didier Derny <didier@omnix.net> To: Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Let 3.x die ASAP? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000329080220.7123A-100000@omnix.net> In-Reply-To: <20000328113633.A28085@cons.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
why dont you call freebsd freebsd2000 freebsd2001.... freebsd seems running version after version and not stability... I think that during 1994-1998 I made the right choice to choose FreeBSD instead of linux. in 1999 (3.x) I was not so sure at all, no stability too many problems. In 2000 it's getting worse, for me FreeBSD is not stable at all the future of FreeBSD is not so clear, version follow after version but I still have no support for my sound board, realplayer, oracle... The clients are telling me to install Linux instead of FreeBSD (for oracle)... I've just finished uprading the machines to 3.4-release and you are telling me that there is no future for 3.X... I'm about to buy a smp machine but I see so many horror stories on the mailling lists that I'm not sure at all that I should use a smp machine (or install linux instead of FreeBSD)... one of our client is running a smp machine with 3.2-BETA without any probleme... another client is running 3.4-RELEASE and his machine is rebooting on heavy load... with all these problemes the end of 3.x will probably be the end of FreeBSD for me! -- Didier Derny didier@omnix.net On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Martin Cracauer wrote: > A bit of a controvesical question, for sure. > > I am so impressed with the results of upgrading my more important > machines to 4.0 or 4-stable that I could imagine not to produce any > more 3.x releases. > > Let us consider what happens when we release 3.5 before or at the same > time as 4.1: > - People will publish reviews based on 3.5 instead of 4.1. As usual, > an unadaequate number of them running on SMP machines. > - People will run into inferious hardware support, especially they > will have trouble with large IDE disks and/or IDE PCI controller. > Similar issues for Laptop users. > - People will continue to run with inferiour NFS, Linux emulator etc. > The same applies to networking fixes against attacks, especially > DOS. > - People will choose 3.5 over 4.1 and will later go through an > 3.x->4.x upgrade for no good reason. > - The remaining issues in 4.x (especially hardware) aren't addressed > as fast. There will be some issues with "unclean" usage that the > core userbase doesn't use that don't come up until the masses jump > on them. > > For me, the real reason is that I now hate the latest 3.x after seeing > the improvements. It is near to junk, IMHO. > > Several machine of mine had gone instable while moving from 3.[01] to > 3.4-stable and I suspected hardware trouble. I didn't debug it because > I didn't want to mess with 3.x anymore. Now after upgrading to 4.x the > same machines are rock-stable again. It is my impression that the 3.x > branch lost the required testing when the core committers moved to > 4.0-current. Higher releases of 3.x are just not polished/tested > enough anymore, beside the undoubted concrete bug fixes. > > Speaking of testing by committers, I also hate to have machines for > three branches running to develop bugfixes that apply to more than > -current. In fact my last 3.x machine (besides a 3.1 machine that > doesn't have the IDE troubles I have with 3.4-stable) is now a > production machine of my employer that I'd like to upgrade as well. I > couldn't think of a good reason to delay that upgrade for 3 or 6 > months if my boss asked me. When i upgrade, I had to commit userland > bugfixes to 3.x with only testing them on a newer branch. Kernel > bugfixes would be impossible unless I find someone to test them for > me. > > I assume that I'm not alone here. That many bug-fixing committers will > not move with 3 machines along the current branches and that 3.5 will > not be a worthy successor to our previous *.5 releases. > > Opinions? > > Martin > -- > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ > Tel.: (private) +4940 5221829 Fax.: (private) +4940 5228536 > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.1000329080220.7123A-100000>