Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:30:34 GMT From: Bolli =?ISO-8859-1?Q?P=E1lmason?= <beastie@internet.is> To: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4.9 or 5.2.1 ? Message-ID: <200402271530.i1RFUYDx2449450@cg.c.is> In-Reply-To: <001901c3fd34$8f37a060$9700000a@twofence> References: <001901c3fd34$8f37a060$9700000a@twofence>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 14:21:03 +0100 "Eelco Zwart" <eelco.zwart@planet.nl> wrote: > I've read a lot (book and this lists) and now I finally going to install FBSD! > > My first choice was to install 4.9 stable but after 5.2.1 was released I started to doubt.. Can anyone give me a good reason why not to start with 5.2.1 as a newbie ? > > It's just a 'play-around' installation ... > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-newbies > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-newbies-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" Hello Well I was in the same shoes as you a week ago, I installed 5.2.1 and it was a great experience, everything just worked, even my raid-0 (HT370). I've done buildworld and installed xwindows, icewm (windowmanager), firefox (browser), sylpheed (mail), gaim (MSN) and eterm to name a few from ports, no problems so far. So if you are just going to "play-around" you should go for 5.2.1, if you have a mission critical machine go for 4.9. Bolli
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200402271530.i1RFUYDx2449450>