From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 3 07:30:11 2003 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 BA0D737B401 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 07:30:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from goku.city-net.com (mail.city-net.com [198.144.32.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FFEE43FCB for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 07:30:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from billm@craftmfg.com) Received: from mail.craftmfg.com ([198.144.45.208]) by goku.city-net.com (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h33Fb46d19280501 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 10:37:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from newws3 ([172.24.56.97]) by mail.craftmfg.com (8.12.6p2/8.12.6) with SMTP id h33FU8Ik008604 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 10:30:08 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from billm@craftmfg.com) Message-ID: <002901c2f9f5$e909c2f0$613818ac@craftmfg.com> From: "Bill Moran" To: Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 10:30:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Subject: Overall "feel" for the stability of FreeBSD 5 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: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 15:30:12 -0000 I'm considering setting up a FreeBSD 5 machine as a dedicated backup/archive computer on a network I administer. I'm curious to hear some opinions on how wise this is. I know that 5 is still in a -CURRENT status and I've seen (and repeated) the warnings that it's not really production quality yet. So I'm curious as to a number of facets of its capibilities: 1) With the current developmet effort ... does it seem like 5.1 will be -STABLE ... or do folks feel that a -STABLE brand is further off (5.2?) 2) For a dedicated backup server, that can tolerate the performance problems that folks have been reporting, and won't upset the entire office if it panics on occasion, is 5 good enough at this point? I know this is inviting a lot of opinion and conjecture ... but I need some idea of where I can go with this. These folks need a solution soon, and I don't want to pass on something that's not ready yet. On the flip side, the nature of the beast means that it doesn't NEED to be a reliable as I normally expect a FreeBSD server to be, so there's a little more tolerance than usual. Any input is greatly appreciated. -Bill