From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Jun 21 10:36:11 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from resnet.uoregon.edu (resnet.uoregon.edu [128.223.144.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3C8A150C1 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 1999 10:36:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu) Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost) by resnet.uoregon.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA50739; Mon, 21 Jun 1999 10:36:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 10:36:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White To: "Marcelo J. Iturbe" Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Which FreeBSD? 2.2.8, 3.0, 3.1 or 3.2? In-Reply-To: <19990618194422.A0D3D1933F8@www> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 18 Jun 1999, Marcelo J. Iturbe wrote: > I am not on this mailing list so please reply to marcelo@msm.cl > I have to set up a robust web server which will also be handling mail, ftp, > DNS etc. aswell as being an IP masquerading machine, which might turn into > a firewall later on. > It's going to be a verry busy server with quite a load. So I am a bit > sceptic (SP?) of using "the latest of the latest", but at the same time I > do not want to miss out on any mayor improvements! > So I figured I'd play it safe and ask. > Should I go ahead and use 3.2-stable? or should I hang back and use 2.2.8, > just in case something sliped through on the 3.2 release? I'd probably go with 3.2 to get the extra firewall features. That will be a busy box though. Doug White Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | www.freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message