From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Oct 22 20:15:54 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from ns.internet.dk (ns.internet.dk [194.19.140.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732E937B479 for ; Sun, 22 Oct 2000 20:15:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by ns.internet.dk (8.11.1/8.11.1) with UUCP id e9N3Fju02357; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 05:15:45 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from leifn@neland.dk) Received: from gina (gina.neland.dk [192.168.0.14]) by arnold.neland.dk (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id e9N2d3Z03511; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 04:39:04 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from leifn@neland.dk) Message-ID: <02af01c03c9a$75f08120$0e00a8c0@neland.dk> Reply-To: "Leif Neland" From: "Leif Neland" To: "stop here. start everywhere." Cc: References: <39F3609E.83C02B3E@bellatlantic.net> <39F38893.6A8204A@bellatlantic.net> <39F3902A.6846BB49@phpStop.com> Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 04:36:31 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Hi all again, > > Speaking of this subject again, I have read in the archives that FreeBSD > has a method of building the whole source tree using the "make world" > command. Although this is a nice feature, but isn't too much risky to > upgrade the whole system in one shot? > > What if something breaks down after you've recompiled? Your system would > be dead. In Linux, on the contrary, there's no such feature and you'll > need to take the server anyways to upgrade it, which seems as a good way > of doing things. In the meantime, another backup server can take its > position. I guess in this fashion, Linux is better than FreeBSD... or > did I miss something here? > The make world is done in two steps: first is everything compiled to /var/obj, then everything is installed. Per definition production servers run freebsd-stable, which by definition are never broken :-). By definition freebsd-current are not for production and are allowed to be broken. You could compile on a testserver; when you are satisfied it works, you can install other servers from that via nfs. I have updated servers while they were online without problems. An OS shouldn't limit you from taking the risc of shooting yourself in the foot if you feel you have a legitimate reason to do so. Leif > /John > > > Sergey Babkin wrote: > > > > By the way, speaking of that, things in FreeBSD tend to be more > > synchronous with docs than in Linux. Also FreeBSD has much better > > backwards compatibility (though alas still not as good as commercial > > systems). In Linux the applications tend to break and require > > recompilation when the kernel is upgraded to the next > > second-digit version. > > > > -SB > > -- > Regards, > > phpStop.com http://www.phpstop.com/ > stop here. start everywhere. mailto:info@phpstop.com > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message