From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 8 20:45:23 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 5455916A41C for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 20:45:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhs@flat.berklix.net) Received: from tower.berklix.org (bsd.bsn.com [194.221.32.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E644843D1F for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 20:45:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhs@flat.berklix.net) Received: from js.berklix.net (p549A7C8C.dip.t-dialin.net [84.154.124.140]) (authenticated bits=0) by tower.berklix.org (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j58KjI8o067781; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:45:19 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@flat.berklix.net) Received: from fire.jhs.private (fire.jhs.private [192.168.91.41]) by js.berklix.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j58KjC7p001092; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:45:13 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@flat.berklix.net) Received: from fire.jhs.private (localhost.jhs.private [127.0.0.1]) by fire.jhs.private (8.13.1/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j58KjClF002589; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:45:12 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@fire.jhs.private) Message-Id: <200506082045.j58KjClF002589@fire.jhs.private> to: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Message from "David Hogan" of "Wed, 08 Jun 2005 10:13:16 +1000." <20050608001306.3FB1F43D5C@mx1.FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 22:45:12 +0200 From: "Julian H. Stacey" Cc: David Hogan 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 20:45:23 -0000 > "something's up" with the stability of the 5.4 release. If I were to deploy > a server right now, would a seasoned FreeBSD user use 4.11 or 5.4? My experience: go 5.3 or 4.11, but avoid 5.4. Here's why: I've downgraded my main amd64 tower & 386 laptop from 5.4 to 5.3. I've also abandoned amd64 for i386. (PS ref. `seasoned' I've been with FreeBSD since before it had release numbers :-) I havent had time to analyse or dmesg all my problems, but I got tired of 5.4 & amd64 pain & needed lost functionality back. Both those boxes are dual boot partitons, but both just had main 5.4-rel. & spare 5.4-rel for rescue. Now I've wound back to 5.3 & regained my lost functionality, I'll be taking one but Not both partitions on one or each host, forward to (possibly) 5.4-rel, or more likely stable or current & amd64 native (for the one box) again, & analysing problems & fixing &/ or bug reporting with dmesg etc. But the one thing I will Not be doing is raising all partitions to 5.4. 5.4-rel is a pain here, 5.3-rel. is better for me. A few problems I've had include: rdist works on 5.3 source host, but not from 5.4+amd64 (yes, I'm sure someone's out there will work, but Mine doesn't (user & su) & does with 5.3, which iis all that maters to me :-) also rdist depends on which of rdist & rdist6 & 44bsd-rdist, & which protocol, & what version other end etc, which is why I'd not mentioned till now, & yes I know rsync works too, but I'm comfortable with rdist[6]) & 5.3, not 5.4. usbd (i386+5.4) fails to recognise my sim card on a USB Cruzer, but 5.3 works OK various ports dont work for amd64 (or say they dont even if they do. ports/ (as usual/ often) is a mess, various broken things, competing versions & a host of other niggles, (well I use a Lot of ports, to be precise I use all of http://berklix.com/~jhs/src/bsd/fixes/FreeBSD/ports/jhs/*/Makefile.local & life's too short to document & fix all problems, (+ prob reports dont belong here but in dmesg. or ports@) make has a problem on amd64 5.4-rel., I reported it, & tested & reported OK on fixes from Harti Brandt, who wrote Thu, 2 Jun: I have committed it to RELENG_5. I've set the MFC timer to two weeks. GCC 3.4.2 on 5.4-RELEASE has a bug for amd64, I started avoiding that by putting CFLAGS= -O0 in /etc/make.conf More info from: Message from "David O'Brien" of "Thu, 02 Jun 2005 01:26:15 PDT." <20050602082615.GA36096@dragon.NUXI.org> I think I had some other problems I can't remember off hand, but I got tired of agravation so retreated to 5.3-rel. I also run 4.10, 4.11 & various 5.* on other gates, net servers, & internal hosts. Doubtless 5.4 has loads of great additions over 5.3, doubtless most of my hastles can be fixed/ avoided/ diagnosed etc, but it was just too much hastle all at once, hence my "back to 5.3 & forward to stable on just one partition" dual approach. This is Not a complaint, I still Really like FreeBSD, I'm just less enthusiastic about 5.4-RELEASE than 5.3. (Perhaps one might find others saying the opposite probably depends what features one uses). - Julian Stacey Net & Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com Mail in Ascii (Html=Spam). Ihr Rauch = mein allergischer Kopfschmerz.