Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:53:59 +0300 From: Iulian M <eti@erata.net> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4.11 vs. 5.4 stablity Message-ID: <200507270954.03899.eti@erata.net> In-Reply-To: <42E6C028.6020806@datacomm.ch> References: <42E6BD98.1060300@tigergroup.org> <42E6C028.6020806@datacomm.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Wednesday 27 July 2005 01:58, Benjamin Lutz wrote: > Eriq wrote: > > I am running 4.11 on a dual amd box and have found it solid as a rock > > for running apache2, postgres, dns and postfix. But now I am thinking > > of upgrading. I wonder if 5.4 is as stable for these servers that > > must run 24/7. And is it worth all the trouble to do, I have grown > > pretty lazy :) The bad part about an rock stable system that works flawlessly is that as an admin you do become lazy ... very lazy :). You should not change the os on the server, at least not before testing (and learning) 5.X/6.X non critical systems. -- Accuracy, n.: The vice of being right [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBC5y+LE4semV9hLhcRAuZvAKCb8Z4AqoJDDwFlqLZk3gHbPOZl1QCgpMhB fxSDixHhPePfZjz69V9xPjg= =8T61 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200507270954.03899.eti>