From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 5 16:17:07 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9213916A420 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:17:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhorne@ncs.dfwlp.com) Received: from pollux.dfwlp.com (rrcs-64-183-212-244.sw.biz.rr.com [64.183.212.244]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3128613C4B7 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:17:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhorne@ncs.dfwlp.com) Received: from pollux.dfwlp.com (pollux.dfwlp.com [192.168.125.61]) by pollux.dfwlp.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lA5FiGWB045340 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2007 09:44:16 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from jhorne@ncs.dfwlp.com) Received: (from www@localhost) by pollux.dfwlp.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id lA5FiGim045339 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Mon, 5 Nov 2007 09:44:16 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from jhorne@ncs.dfwlp.com) X-Authentication-Warning: pollux.dfwlp.com: www set sender to jhorne@ncs.dfwlp.com using -f Received: from 192.168.125.150 ([192.168.125.150]) by webmail.dfwlp.org (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 09:44:15 -0600 Message-ID: <20071105094415.7ubd7cvhicwwocos@webmail.dfwlp.org> Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 09:44:15 -0600 From: Jonathan Horne To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20071105144320.GA3811@aurora.oekb.co.at> <472F32CE.6050306@cederstrand.dk> In-Reply-To: <472F32CE.6050306@cederstrand.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.4) / FreeBSD-6.2 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.6 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on pollux.dfwlp.com Subject: Re: Rebuilding kernel/system to a state "back-in-time"? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 16:17:07 -0000 Quoting Erik Cederstrand : > > Should be tag=3DRELENG_6_2 > ... > > That should suffice. > > > This assumes you're already running 6.2. As long as you don't switch > branches (or choose a date before the branch occurred!), you should be > good to go. > > Erik i would agree with erik's advice, as IMO its quite sound (when it =20 comes to operating a server as opposed to a desktop). however, i =20 would add this detail so that there can be some what and why to go =20 with it: RELENG_6_2 will take you to 6.2-RELEASE-p8. it *will* be back in =20 time, but it will be only 'critical' patches since the intial =20 6.2-RELEASE. IMO, (and forgive me, i generally dont spew my opinions where they =20 arent welcome or asked for), RELENG_6_2 is better for a server over =20 RELENG_6 (aka, -STABLE), as it doesnt include items that are not =20 critically required for secure and stable operation. remember, that =20 the true -STABLE branch has items merged in from -CURRENT (call it =20 back-ported?). let say, you already know that -p8 is the latest 6.2 revision. you =20 get on a server, you log in, and it says 6.2-RELEASE-p8. you already =20 know that this system is up to date. if you log in, and see =20 6.2-STABLE... you dont immediately know when this system was last =20 rebuilt without doing some other version checks first. i have to be =20 honest, when it comes to managing a farm full of servers, i like my =20 "visual version checks"... the same way i like my women: easy. cheers, --=20 Jonathan Horne DFWLP Network Consulting Services jhorne@ncs.dfwlp.com http://www.dfwlp.com 214.287.4373 - mobile ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.