From owner-freebsd-alpha Wed Oct 18 5:58: 4 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from duke.cs.duke.edu (duke.cs.duke.edu [152.3.140.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 996CA37B4C5 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 05:58:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (grasshopper.cs.duke.edu [152.3.145.30]) by duke.cs.duke.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA25592; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 08:57:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from gallatin@localhost) by grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (8.11.0/8.9.1) id e9ICvvs93110; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 08:57:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) From: Andrew Gallatin MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 08:57:57 -0400 (EDT) To: Kris Kirby Cc: freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Alpha 4.x releases (production quality?) In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14829.40410.255103.869589@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Kris Kirby writes: > > Would a general concensus of the folks on -alpha agree that FreeBSD 4.x > for the Alpha is stable enough for a production server? If you can actually manage to get it installed, it is just as stable as FreeBSD/i386. Most embarassing problems are in the install/bootstrap area. If you decide to try it, I'd suggest installing 4.0-release and buildworlding your way to -stable. When you do this, copy the original (4.0-release) /boot/loader over what installworld installs. Drew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message