Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 09:46:39 +0100 From: HERBELOT Thierry <Thierry.Herbelot@alcatel.fr> To: Kelly Yancey <kbyanc@freedomnet.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 4.0-current VS 3.1-stable? Message-ID: <36DF99EF.C889F96C@telspace.alcatel.fr> References: <000801be6686$4ed22bc0$1468f0c6@tech.freedomnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Huge post :) If you don't really know why you should run -Current, you need -Stable (and even more so if you are running servers). There are some experimental new functions in -Current (The new VM, ...). When (and if ?) these are considered stable enough, they do get backported in Stable. IDE performance in now's Stable is quite good (DMA is supported) - The new Ata should not give lots of new performances ; it should however make IDE drives a bit more independant of the actual attachment : there could be a driver for parallel-port - attached drives, for example. HTH TfH Kelly Yancey wrote: > > I've been using FreeBSD since 2.1.5 and am familiar with the whole idea > that -stable is for servers, -current is for developers. I've always > restricted myself to -stable at work (Internet servers). But I am setting up > a server for someone else who already has a few linux servers (recent...they > went with linux because the kid setting them up worked part time there and > I'm just a mere consultant :( ). The problem is that I *know* they are going > to be comparing these machines to each other. > I like the fact the FreeBSD is stable, and they are servers, so my first > inclination is 3.1-stable. But I read the freebsd-current mailing list daily > and am envious of all the new features going into it (new ATA code, many > bug-fixes, etc). The bug-fixes mainly interest me because I can't have > anything go wrong if I want to convert all of their other servers over to > FreeBSD too. Now, I don't read the -stable mailing list any more, so I don't > know if a) these bug fixes only apply to new bugs in 4.0 or b) have been > backported to 3.1-stable? > My other rationalization for even considering 4.0-current is that it is > such a recent split. It would seem that the two branches couldn't be that > far from each other yet. > > So, please pardon my new spin on an old question, I'm looking for someone > with some more insight into the current state of both -current and -stable > (as of 3/4/99) to perhaps share a bit of that insight. The truth is that I > won't be installing FreeBSD there for probably another 2 days (perhaps > Soren's new ATA driver will have DMA support by then :) ...they still use > IDE, yuk). I really appreciate the help, > > Kelly > ~kbyanc@posi.net~ > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36DF99EF.C889F96C>