From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 13 09:02:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C94216A4CE for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 09:02:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ptb-relay03.plus.net (ptb-relay03.plus.net [212.159.14.214]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B9443D75 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 09:01:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from simong@desktop-guardian.com) Received: from [81.174.227.186] (helo=desktop-guardian.com) by ptb-relay03.plus.net with smtp (Exim) id 1AgRuZ-0004Yk-Jz for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:01:03 +0000 Received: (qmail 74853 invoked by uid 1006); 13 Jan 2004 17:01:01 -0000 Received: from simong@desktop-guardian.com by dtg25 by uid 82 with qmail-scanner-1.16 (clamscan: 0.54. spamassassin: 2.55. Clear:. Processed in 112.220207 secs); 13 Jan 2004 17:01:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dtg17) (192.168.0.17) by 192.168.0.25 with SMTP; 13 Jan 2004 16:59:06 -0000 Message-ID: <072b01c3d9f6$9cf1f270$1100a8c0@dtg17> From: "Simon Gray" To: "David Meier" , References: <40041172.5070602@daleco.biz> <64730.195.141.214.38.1074009759.squirrel@hiwatt.lognet.ch> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:59:30 -0000 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 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: Re: How "safe" is 5.2 to use? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:02:40 -0000 > I understand my question officially can only be answered to still use 4.9. > I just wonder if anyone has used the 5.x for similar services as I plan to > do, successfully or not. > > Dave I run a similar set-up on a 4.8 box (with latest patchlevel) that's stable. I also run another box running 5.0 again with the latest patchlevel - both are stable. (Both Intel board/cpu's) Unless you are after anything particular within the 5.x series, I'd stick with what's stable 4.x branch (not saying that 5.x isn't stable, it's just that not all the bugs may have been found/fixed yet). New features are nice, but not always 100% stable - having said that, personally I'd not had any problems with either. Admittedly haven't tried 5.1 nor 5.2 but still. Might be worth having a closer look at the difference in the two releases and seeing if 5.x will provide any extra features that you'll use. HTH Simon