Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Jan 1999 13:44:11 -0800 (PST)
From:      "Jason C. Wells" <jcwells@u.washington.edu>
To:        Lyle_Wallace@dgii.com
Cc:        questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Y2K compliant
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9901181333390.16892-100000@s8-37-26.student.washington.edu>
In-Reply-To: <19990118144846.B23343@winternet.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Nathan Ahlstrom wrote:

>Lyle_Wallace@dgii.com wrote:
>> Are these versions of FreeBSD Y2K compliant:
>> 2.2.5?
>> 2.2.6?
>> 2.2.7?
>
>Nope.  You have to run a very recent -STABLE.  We are currently in 
>the process of conducting a thorough review of the FreeBSD source.

You do not need to run -stable to have a y2k safe FreeBSD system. As the
URL shows there have been some problems discovered in a couple of
programs. Users of 2.2.5 forward should not experience any _system_
problems.

This being said, stating that software is "y2k safe" is like saying the
software is "bug free" or that air travel is safe. The issue is risk and
the risk with FreeBSD is very low.

One need not replace the entire OS to fix the problems described on our
y2k page. As the doc says, one should apply sound system administration
principles. If you can weather downtime, then upgrade all your systems. If
you cannot, then fix the affected programs.

Catchya Later,		|	Give me UNIX or give me a typewriter.
Jason Wells		|	http://www.freebsd.org/


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9901181333390.16892-100000>