From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 22 04:07:32 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BF3216A4CE for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 04:07:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from aslan.camp.com (portal.camp.com [206.124.12.62]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E2D843D54 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 04:07:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from steve@camp.com) Received: from aslan.camp.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aslan.camp.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id iAM2eUdM006688; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:40:30 -0700 (MST) Received: (from steve@localhost) by aslan.camp.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id iAM2eUQF006687; Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:40:30 -0700 (MST) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:40:30 -0700 From: Steve Camp Message-ID: <20041121194029.B4962@aslan.camp.com> References: <20041121180539.A4962@aslan.camp.com> <41A14D60.4080709@makeworld.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <41A14D60.4080709@makeworld.com>; from racerx@makeworld.com on Sun, Nov 21, 2004 at 08:22:24PM -0600 cc: Eric Kjeldergaard cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Most Suitable version of FBSD for server? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 04:07:32 -0000 On Sun, Nov 21, 2004 at 08:22:24PM -0600, Chris wrote: > Eric Kjeldergaard wrote: > >>Which version of FBSD is currently most appropriate for use as > >>a server (mail, NFS, samba)? 4.9? 4.10? 5.somethingorother? > > > > > > Obviously you'll want something current so 4.9 is out of the question. > > That kind of leaves the 2 distinct branches. These are the 4.x and > > 5.x and are currently represented by 5.3 and 4.10. Which you want is > > rather for you to decide. I recommend trying both. It seems like a > > lot of work, but is probably best. Many say that for SMP, 5.3 has > > advantages although there have been threads in the lists that argue > > both ways. I would recommend trying with 4.10 for a while and 5.3 for > > a while and load-testing each to see which performs better and which > > best fits your needs. > > > > While I agree (in part) I think the user ought to move to 5.x - 4.x is > legacy, and no telling how much longer it will be until there is little > to no support or development for it. Is the branch of 5.x (assuming 5.3 based on previous response) been fairly stable in people's experiences? Has it been fairly bug-free? (I realize that is a pretty subjective question...) Regards, -- Steve Camp steve@camp.com