From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 8 22:34:49 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 E4DE016A41C for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:34:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from david@fundamentalit.com) Received: from mail.fundamentalit.com (mail.fundamentalit.com [202.160.128.219]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9630F43D49 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:34:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from david@fundamentalit.com) Received: from [203.206.87.172] (helo=dev) by mail.fundamentalit.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.50) id 1Dg98J-00046U-32; Thu, 09 Jun 2005 08:34:47 +1000 From: "David Hogan" To: Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 08:35:01 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 In-Reply-To: <42A6C7CE.9000002@incubus.de> thread-index: AcVsFC9h5dbqa691TVCcTsIKjgSqdwAXCWVw Message-Id: <20050608223449.9630F43D49@mx1.FreeBSD.org> Cc: 'Matthias Buelow' 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 22:34:50 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthias Buelow [mailto:mkb@incubus.de] > Sent: Wednesday, 8 June 2005 8:26 PM > If that Trustix works for you now well, you'd be careless to migrate > now. If it works, why change it? > My experience with the 5.x tree so far is that it's ok for a SOHO or > private environment but I wouldn't trust it if my money (or job) > depended on it. Maybe in a year, or two but not now. I have a few reasons for considering a move away from Trustix and linux. Main reason: I deployed a couple of boxes about 12 months ago when there was no clear version of TSL to use - the 1.5 release was dated and winding up support wise, and the 2.1 release was an interim release with a shorter than normal support lifespan (ending end of this month, 6 months after the 2.2 release). There is a 2.1 -> 2.2 upgrade procedure, but it's not supported and thus risky to do remotely on the more important of these machines. 2.1 has proven rock solid for me, but since security updates wont be released after the end of the month, I have to do something one way or another. Other reasons: I found that jails are much more powerful than the linux chroot() call - and I love that the installer lets you install in an arbitrary dir on the filesystem. Many seasoned unix people have spoken to me about how much more stable FreeBSD is, although at the risk of starting a flame war I'm not convinced that this is still the case, at least not for the 5 series vs Trustix. (vs most linux distributions - sure :D ) Ports are cool. Trustix doesn't provide an exim package, so I'm forever updating that myself. Filesystem snapshots .. UnionFS. -- I'd like to thank everyone for sharing their thoughts on this matter. I have decided to stick with Trustix on our servers for now, and maybe start playing with FreeBSD on some real boxes and maybe try running a FreeBSD desktop. I am attracted to the FreeBSD way of doing things, but given that I'm not yet an experienced FreeBSD user I might be taking a bit of a risk by migrating at this stage. Cheers, David Hogan