Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 23 Apr 2012 21:42:39 +0000
From:      Lars Wilke <lw@lwilke.de>
To:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD_9.0_Port_Upgrade
Message-ID:  <fvug69-r8v.ln1@lwilke.de>
References:  <542d8a7ba1b614d2260f117a29e412cb.squirrel@mail.digital-infotech.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Prabhpal S. Mavi wrote:
>  Dear FreeBSD Friends,
>
>  i have FreeBSD 9.0 Stable Running the following roles for past four
>  months. Everything is functioning smooth alright. I read that system
>  should be upgraded frequently. i am afraid that if i upgrade something can
>  break.
>
>  i am planing to run it like that until FreeBSD 9.2 is out, perhaps two
>  years before upgrade. i am not sure if this is a good idea. i seek your
>  advice about the upgrade.
>
>  ROLE:   Postfix Mail Server With Virtual Users Support Using MySQL Database,
>  Apache Web Server, Certificate Authority (CA). Squirrelmail, Postfix
>  Admin, Maia MailGuard Postfix-Admin, SPF, Postgray Filter, spamassassin,
>  Clamav.
>  [...]

First you have to be aware that the stable tree in FBSD means something
completly different than a release in Red Hat/CentOS land.

Here stable is the stable branch which gets updates, bugfixes and new
features. From this branch the next release is created.

These updates and new features might not be as disruptive as
in the development branch but still things change.
So you might consider using a release branch instead, which only gets
security and critical bugfixes.

Critical really means critical here and not every bugfix around.
In this regard a release branch is very stable :)

So with stable you are really tracking a rolling release more like
Debian testing or say a rolling release repository like the fasttrack
repo in CentOS/Scientific Linux.

While the release branch is more like staying on the same minor release
in Red Hat. But the minor release in Red Hat gets far more updates even
for not so serious bugs and sometimes even driver updates.

The last part is AFAIU the reason that many people recomend the stable
branch in FBSD, b/c you get bugfixes and some driver updates faster or
even at all.

If you would be on the release branch you would either have to switch
to stable or wait for the next release branch to get these updates and
fixes.

As you are on stable i would suggest a test machine with the same
setup, or at least a virtual machine with the same setup. Maybe a jail
will do for you, else you could use something like virtualbox.

Backups, always have backups and do some backups before doing something.
Under Linux there is a nifty tool called etckeeper, it basically hooks
into the package manager and tracks changes to /etc via version control.
No idea if something like this is available under FBSD but you could
roll your own ...

If you use ZFS snapshots are easy and cheap, also there is basic Live
Upgrade/Boot Environment support.

   http://anonsvn.h3q.com/projects/freebsd-patches/wiki/manageBE

If you use ZFS, i really suggest you look into this one, b/c it allows
you to switch your complete system around at will. Also, the updates
can be tested on an exact production copy without affecting the running
system.

On the security side i would suggest some form of host basesd intrusion
detection and some common sense hardening.

Generally monitoring (alarming+capacity/trending) for a live service is
a good idea, too.

Accompanied by following the security advisories and using portaudit should
be enough, i guess ...

hth
   --lars




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?fvug69-r8v.ln1>