From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Apr 22 8:45:54 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from cc02du.unity.ncsu.edu (cc02du.unity.ncsu.edu [152.1.1.174]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E551151AA for ; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:45:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rdkeys@unity.ncsu.edu) Received: (from rdkeys@localhost) by cc02du.unity.ncsu.edu (8.8.4/UC02Jan97) id LAA22801; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:41:43 -0400 (EDT) From: rdkeys@unity.ncsu.edu Message-Id: <199904221541.LAA22801@cc02du.unity.ncsu.edu> Subject: Re: FBSD 2.2.6 --- any good still for server use? To: wghicks@bellsouth.net (W Gerald Hicks) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:41:43 -0400 (EDT) Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199904220331.XAA64731@bellsouth.net> from "W Gerald Hicks" at Apr 21, 99 11:31:38 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24/POP] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > Another point worth considering is whether third-party software will continue > to support 2.2.x for the life cycle of the system. If this box is to be a > web server then one might like to track the security fixes for its httpd > as well. > > I'd suggest 3.x for a variety of other reasons as well, among them > is softupdate support. You bring up some interesting points. I was planning to roll out the box based upon non-proprietary software bits. I would assume apache will always be compatible, and I build it as it updates from their sources, direct. If I chose to go 2.2.8 for stability reasons, are there any particular web server software bits that I should worry about becoming dated or stale, over the course of say a year or so. I will assume that I will update the machine probably once a year over the course of several years, and the replace it after 3 years or so. Bob Keys To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message