Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:19:43 -0700 From: "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC" <chad@shire.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How "safe" is 5.2 to use? Message-ID: <EA3F35BC-45DB-11D8-8CDF-003065A70D30@shire.net> In-Reply-To: <auto-000071751279@doruk.net.tr> References: <auto-000071751279@doruk.net.tr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 13, 2004, at 4:45 AM, Vahric MUHTARYAN wrote: > Hi , > > You have to use FreeBSD 4.9, because you can see in freebsd web page > prodcution version is 4.9. and please test it maybe you will see you > can not > install 5.2 on your hardware because when I try to install 5.1 on my > intel > platform I faced a problem then now I'm using 4.9 . Everybody will say > that > wait until more tested version and now its 4.9 > Which begs the question. Will FBSD 5 ever be deemed worthy for production use? Over the last year it was said in this list: 5.1 is still a testing version not recommended for production, but 5.2 will be better suited for production. I intend to transition a less used production server from 4.7 to 5.2 sometime in the next month, and we'll see how it goes. There are certain things I would like from 5... Chad > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of David Meier > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:19 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: How "safe" is 5.2 to use? > > Hello list, > > I am relatively new to the world of FreeBSD. But first, congrats to the > new release! I am somewhat insecure on how trustfully I can use the new > release for my intended use (and I hope my questions haven't been > posted a > zillion times before). Therefore I hope the FreeBSD nuts can advise me > whether to go for 4.9 or 5.2.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EA3F35BC-45DB-11D8-8CDF-003065A70D30>