From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 8 15:47:32 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA32C16A4CE for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:47:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from imladris.teardrop.org (imladris.teardrop.org [66.92.66.16]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5692143D39 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:47:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from snow+freebsd-current@teardrop.org) Received: by imladris.teardrop.org (Postfix, from userid 100) id DDA0BC06E4; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:47:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:47:52 -0500 From: James Snow To: Steve Ames Message-ID: <20050208154752.GB93774@teardrop.org> References: <4205F382.8020404@freebsd.org> <20050206120822.3d8e381a.flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org> <200502061327.03530.mark.rowlands@mypost.se> <20050208144032.GA6592@akroteq.com> <20050208153922.GC75950@energistic.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050208153922.GC75950@energistic.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: Andy Firman cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The case for FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 15:47:32 -0000 On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 10:39:22AM -0500, Steve Ames wrote: > On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 05:40:32AM -0900, Andy Firman wrote: > > > > Your comments are disturbing. I run a few 4.10 servers and am getting ready > > for a couple new ones and would like to go with 5.3 stable. > > For a while 5.X was pretty iffy. A number of people who tried it at that > time are still stuck with that impression. IMHO, its unjustified. I hate to post a "me too" but I feel compelled to offer my wholehearted agreement with this statement. I installed a number of 5.3-R machines at my old place of employment. They remain the most stable machines in the company by far. At home I run a 5.3-R machine with a RAID3 volume and a 5.3-STABLE machine with two RAID1 volumes - one of them bootable. Both machines have been flawless with the exception of some bad RAM; obviously not FreeBSD's fault. YMMV, but I've been running 5.x since one of the RCs and I've never had a problem that wasn't my own fault in some way. -Snow