From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 24 23:29:36 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 525B016A4CE for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:29:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fast.dnswatch.com (fast.dnswatch.com [216.177.243.43]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94CDB43D1F for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:29:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from null@dnswatch.com) Received: from fast.dnswatch.com (localhost.dnswatch.com [127.0.0.1]) by fast.dnswatch.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j3ONTWsm041919; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 16:29:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from null@dnswatch.com) Received: (from www@localhost) by fast.dnswatch.com (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id j3ONTVLK041918; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 16:29:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from null@dnswatch.com) X-Authentication-Warning: fast.dnswatch.com: www set sender to null@dnswatch.com using -f Received: from ns0.1command.com ([216.177.243.38]) (DNSwatch.com_WebMail authenticated user null) by webmail.dnswatch.com with HTTP; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 16:29:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3822.216.177.243.38.1114385370.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> In-Reply-To: <20050424151517.O68772@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> References: <20050424175543.71041.qmail@web51805.mail.yahoo.com> <20050424151517.O68772@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 16:29:30 -0700 (PDT) From: "/dev/null" To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, andy@siliconlandmark.com User-Agent: DNSwatch.com_WebMail/1.4.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:29:36 -0000 Greetings, I have been on FreeBSD since the start. As a hobby until 3.x where I began to replace Winblows servers with FBSD. I stayed with 4.2 the longest. I still have 2 servers running it. However, I decided to test 5.0-RC2 on a lightly used server. My reason for the upgrade decision was the fact that some of the applications I used in 4.x were a little immature, not as rhobust, or as stable as I would prefer. My upgrade path = tar cvgf /etc, /root, /var, /usr/home, /usr/local/etc, and /usr/local/www. Then booting to the 5.0-RC2 CD and performing a "fresh" install. Afterwhich I simply merged by backed-up settings and important files. A little while later I used the same upgrade method to upgrade a *heavily* used server. All seemed *mostly* O.K. But security issues were reported. Attempts to go the "patch" route failed miserably. I also found the security patch routes "intuitiveness" !> -1. The patches clobbered my src files and so I decided to go a different route - I chose to burn the 5.3-STABLE CD's, boot to #1 and choose "upgrade" from the insrtallation routine(s). I did *NOT* attempt this before backing up the important nodes listed above. Well, this route didn't turn out to be the most ideal route. So I ultimately blew all the slices away and performed a fresh install of 5.3-STABLE and merge my previous settings/ folders as needed. All in all life on 5.x and the "upgrade" wasn't too bad. I will say that there is ONE issue that I have found and have not yet solved. It now takes at least 2 times longer to build any of the ports. Performance in other areas seems to be lagging as well. I have since upgraded one of the 2 servers to 5.4-RC2 and have been chasing 5.x ever since hoping to find the performance issues will dissappear. Just my experiences thus far FWIW. -Chris > > On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Patrick Dung wrote: > >> I have read the recent status report. >> IMHO, FreeBSD 5-stable is still not as stable as 4.x series. FreeBSD-5 >> will have a short livetime when FreeBSD-6 comes. > > Ah, the "word on the street"; the usual claims without facts to back them. > > 5.x's undue and unjust reputation is precisely one of the reasons why 6.x > is coming so soon. The other reasons have been outlined by Scott in a > string of emails. Search the archives, if you are interested. > > If there is something you know about "5.x's stability" that we do not, > please go ahead and share it with us. > >> May someone who work in large companies tell us their experience that >> FreeBSD 4 or 5 is installed for servers now, please? > > At work, we have dozens of machines running 5.3 right now. In fact, my > work is drawing up plans to phase out our last handful of 4.x servers. > > Cheers, > Andy > > | Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant > > | Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > //////////////////////////////////////////////////// If only Western Electric had found a way to offer binary licenses for the UNIX system back in 1974, the UNIX system would be running on all PC's today rather than DOS/Windows. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////