From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 6 11:24:36 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4335B16A4E3 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2003 11:24:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from duty.ints.net (duty.ints.net [194.44.58.87]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ACD944001 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2003 11:24:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from borik@duty.ints.net) Received: from duty.ints.net (localhost.ints.net [127.0.0.1]) by duty.ints.net (8.12.9p1/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hA6JOx5u068795; Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:24:59 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from borik@duty.ints.net) Received: by duty.ints.net (8.12.9p1/8.12.9/Submit) id hA6JOxs1068787; Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:24:59 +0200 (EET) From: Dmitriy Borisov Organization: INTS To: Robert Huff , questions@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:24:58 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <5.2.1.1.0.20031105173546.00aeabd8@pop.courtesymortgage.com> <87ad79jzxc.fsf@strauser.com> <16298.27926.308949.557331@jerusalem.litteratus.org> In-Reply-To: <16298.27926.308949.557331@jerusalem.litteratus.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200311062124.58617.borik@ints.net> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: borik@ints.net List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 19:24:36 -0000 On Thursday 6 November 2003 17:47, Robert Huff wrote: > Kirk Strauser writes: > > > How stable is 5.1 for production servers? > > > > I switched my personal server (which runs multiple jails and sees > > more traffic than some of the servers I've worked with > > professionally) to 5.0 over the summer and have been building > > world once a month or so. Other than some short-term problems > > with ATAng that seem to be fixed, I haven't had any problems at > > all. > > On the other hand, for me 5.x/-CURRENT has been more trouble > than (the initial installations within) 2, 3, and 4 put together. > (And I'm not pushing it that hard.) Something else just broke > today. I have 5.1 RELEASE cvsuped to RELENG_5_1 and I havn`t troubles with it. But I had more than more troubles with 5-CURENT (troubles begins from building kernel and hasn`t finished anywhere :) -- Bets regards, Dmitriy Borisov