Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 15:41:30 +0200 From: Christopher Bedford <chrisb@g5.co.za> To: "'freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG'" <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: FW: [Q] How stable is FreeBSD 3.X ? Message-ID: <01BEA6C5.10117420@is99-cbedford.g5.co.za>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>=20 >> NT out of the box needs to be patched for performance and security = reasons. >> No matter what OS you deploy, you must follow the development so to >> speak... Even if only for security reasons. Yes, it would be nice in = a >> perfect world if this were not the case. >>=20 >In my "real job" I am a MVS (now OS/390) systems programmer=20 >responsible for maintaing an operating system and other related=20 >program products. > >The software that ships out of the box (i.e. release) is obsolete=20 >upon arrival. That is just a fact of life in a huge operating system. >Depending on how often I apply service, I could have many hundred=20 >to many thousand software changes to apply. > >Users don't care about operating system changes, in fact they fight=20 >them (why do we have to test?), but we as system administrators=20 >are responsible for maintaining the best operating system we can,=20 >and that requires work on our part. Our company has run 5 to 8 HP3000 MPE computers for more than 12 years = (classis CISC machines upgraded appx 8 years ago to RISC versions). In = all that time I can recall 2 OS crashes, both ages ago on the CISC = versions. We have followed all of the major version releases of MPE V to = MPE XL to MPE/ix (not always immediately) but almost none of the minors. = The machines just keep running... no patches, no crap. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01BEA6C5.10117420>