Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 20:18:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White <dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu> To: Server administration <admin@parliament.ge> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: difference between 2.2.2 and others Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970731201513.11158J-100000@localhost> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970731155030.785A-100000@server.parliament.ge>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 31 Jul 1997, Server administration wrote: > I am the system administrator of the Internet service of the Parliament of > Georgia. Our LAN is running under the FreeBSD 2.05 . Working long and hard.... > I would like to replace the version of operating system by the latest > version > of FreeBSD. As far as I understand the best choice is > the FreeBSD2.2.2-RELEASE. Is my choice correct? Well, 2.2.2 isn't as clean as we'd (I'd?) like it to be. 2.2.1 might be a better bet (and less of a shock). Considering how far behind you are, it may be a better bet to shoot for 2.1.7 first, then up to 2.2.1. I believe some major changes came through in 2.1.0 that may affect your filesystems; you may need to reinstall from scratch. (It may not be a bad idea for such an old system.) > Could you please send me an information concerning the difference between > the basic administrative files. I think the big one was the addition of /etc/sysconfig as a systemwide configuration file. Everything else was pretty static. (In 2.2.2 this became /etc/rc.conf.) It's been so long since I ran 2.0.5 (I have the CD still!) I don't remember all the little changes. Doug White | University of Oregon Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | Residence Networking Assistant http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | Computer Science Major Spam routed to /dev/null by Procmail | Death to Cyberpromo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970731201513.11158J-100000>