From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 8 00:30:53 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FE9316A41F for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 00:30:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd@mail.gbch.net) Received: from gw.gbch.net (gw.gbch.net [203.143.238.93]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4A06843D53 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 00:30:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd@mail.gbch.net) Received: (qmail 3262 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2005 10:30:49 +1000 Received: from gecko.gbch.net (172.16.1.7) by bambi.gbch.net with SMTP; 8 Jun 2005 10:30:49 +1000 Received: (qmail 27802 invoked by uid 1001); 8 Jun 2005 10:30:49 +1000 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:30:49 +1000 From: Greg Black To: David Hogan References: <20050608001306.3FB1F43D5C@mx1.FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050608001306.3FB1F43D5C@mx1.FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i; gjb-muttsend.sh 1.7 2004-10-05 X-Uptime: 108 days X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.10-RELEASE i386 X-Location: Brisbane, Australia; 27.49841S 152.98439E X-URL: http://www.gbch.net/gjb.html X-Blog: http://www.gbch.net/gjb/blog/ X-Image-URL: http://www.gbch.net/gjb/gjb-auug048.gif X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: EBB2 2A92 A79D 1533 AC00 3C46 5D83 B6FB 4B04 B7D6 X-Request-PGP: http://www.gbch.net/keys/4B04B7D6.asc Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.4: Is it generally unstable? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 00:30:53 -0000 On 2005-06-08, David Hogan wrote: > Recently though, I've been playing around with FreeBSD 5.4 on a vmware box, > and I'm beginning to think it may be the way forward in the long run. Having > observed freebsd-stable@freebsd.org for the last couple of weeks, I've > noticed a worrying (to me) amount of traffic regarding kernel panics, > general instability etc, and I'm now posting this in the hope that I might > obtain perspective on this from some experienced FreeBSD users. > > In my time with the Trustix lists, I don't think I came across a serious > kernel issue that wasn't caused by either a lack of a preinstalled driver or > a bad stick of ram. Would you say that this holds true for FreeBSD? I > realise that the FreeBSD user base is a much larger one than the Trustix > user base, and I could be led to believe that the vast majority of people > using 5.4 arent having any problems .. it's just my general impression that > "something's up" with the stability of the 5.4 release. If I were to deploy > a server right now, would a seasoned FreeBSD user use 4.11 or 5.4? I'm currently moving all my customers from 4.x to 5.4 (having run 5.3 and 5.4 on my own machines for some months). I would not move if they used multi-processor machines or non-Intel machines -- but I would not allow my customers to use stuff like that anyway, as none of it is really ready for production use. If you're using standard uni-processor Intel boxes, there's no reason not to go with 5.4; and there are lots of reasons to go with it (and with 6.2 or so when it comes out). Greg