Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:02:39 +0100 (CET) From: "David Meier" <meier@logmail.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How "safe" is 5.2 to use? Message-ID: <64730.195.141.214.38.1074009759.squirrel@hiwatt.lognet.ch> In-Reply-To: <40041172.5070602@daleco.biz> References: <auto-000071751279@doruk.net.tr> <EA3F35BC-45DB-11D8-8CDF-003065A70D30@shire.net> <40041172.5070602@daleco.biz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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 > -----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. > > > > Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: > >> >> 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 > > > The "roadmap" now says that 5.X will branch to > -STABLE around the time of 5.3, instead of the > earlier prediction of 5.2. It seems likely that > folks will take that with a grain of salt, but > perhaps we can be appreciative of the fact that > the RELENG team wants a little extra time to > make sure things are, well, stable before they > name it as such. > > It's not unlike a lot of other projects; I've created > a website in two weeks, and I've another that's > crawled on for well over a year. Some things are > that way, and let's remember the adage "beggars > can't be choosers." I think it would be difficult to > find a large project that hasn't suffered from things > like "feature creep...." For a "free" (in the best > sense of the word) OS, we've got a Good Thing going here. > > FWIW, I'm running 5.1 pretty well in a server environment > at the present, and just built 5.2 yesterday; everything > seems normal and is working well (pending successful completion > of portupgrade, sometime tomorrow, probably ;-) ).... > > Kevin Kinsey >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?64730.195.141.214.38.1074009759.squirrel>