From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 8 13:43:47 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 A6AD516A41C for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 13:43:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nalists@scls.lib.wi.us) Received: from mail.scls.lib.wi.us (mail.scls.lib.wi.us [198.150.40.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61B8043D49 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 13:43:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nalists@scls.lib.wi.us) Received: from [172.26.2.238] ([172.26.2.238]) by mail.scls.lib.wi.us (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j58DhjXm094326; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 08:43:46 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from nalists@scls.lib.wi.us) Message-ID: <42A6F58F.5030205@scls.lib.wi.us> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:41:35 -0500 From: Greg Barniskis User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Jeremy References: <20050608001306.3FB1F43D5C@mx1.FreeBSD.org> <20050608083955.GE39114@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <20050608083955.GE39114@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Hogan , 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 13:43:47 -0000 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) , (608) 266-6348