Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:41:35 -0500 From: Greg Barniskis <nalists@scls.lib.wi.us> To: Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au> Cc: David Hogan <david@fundamentalit.com>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.4: Is it generally unstable? Message-ID: <42A6F58F.5030205@scls.lib.wi.us> In-Reply-To: <20050608083955.GE39114@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> References: <20050608001306.3FB1F43D5C@mx1.FreeBSD.org> <20050608083955.GE39114@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Jeremy wrote: ... > > IMHO, just reading this mailing list will give you an overly negative > view of FreeBSD's stability. My experiences are that FreeBSD 5.4 > using a GENERIC kernel (or something close to it) is quite stable. Second that. Based on the observable chatter around 5.x problem areas since its inception, I opted to keep plugging away with 4.x for a long time after it was marked "legacy". However, I also noted that over time, most reported problems ended up being solved (always a plus when evaluating a system's worthiness ;). I recently began to seriously hammer on several test boxes with RELENG_5 (starting just before 5.4 PRE), and since I started doing that I haven't seen a single problem with a variety of mainstream Wintel hardware components. We plan to migrate all our 4.x production servers over the course of the summer, and are considering deploying a number of new ones. I think that while there have been some outspoken critics of the 5.x branch, and there continue to be some minor rough spots, it is generally a very good system. -- Greg Barniskis, Computer Systems Integrator South Central Library System (SCLS) Library Interchange Network (LINK) <gregb at scls.lib.wi.us>, (608) 266-6348
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42A6F58F.5030205>