Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 15:36:43 -0600 From: Adam Maloney <adamm@sihope.com> To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Who are using FreeBSD for Hosting Env. and Which Update Method Message-ID: <1071005801.15221.216.camel@unixws1> In-Reply-To: <20031209212344.GB93443@complx.LF.net> References: <042601c3be94$c2ff3bd0$019c9752@xp> <001d01c3be97$90ac83b0$3d1f1fac@corp.firstlink.com> <20031209212344.GB93443@complx.LF.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Just thought I'd add my $.02 > Yes. Only a short time (during the installworld and mergemaster) > the system is in a somehow fragile state, but it works most of > the time, so we do it in multiuser. > On most of my boxes I do the installs and merge in multiuser mode. I'm a little more nervous about mail, so I always do it in single-user mode on the mailserver. Fragile is a good word for this state. We did 4.8-STA to 4.9-STA on Sunday on mail and it was probably less than 5 minutes of downtime (single-user, installworld, installkernel, mergemaster, reboot). > The update 4.9 -> 5.2 will probably be much more difficult and > we will test it extensibly, before we do it on production servers. > Yes! > > Why don't you choose binary update methode . Does it have problem ?! or it's > > not a true way to keep up-to-date FreeBSD > > Good question 8-) > I have always done source, and I always sync with stable and re-build everything (rather than using patches). Why? It just "feels" right :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1071005801.15221.216.camel>