Re: Current for production?
I'd like to reinforce this: I'm not a hacker, but have a -current box so I can write about it. (It's difficult to write a book targeting 5.1-release and time it for 5.1-R, when you don't have 5-current. This is one definite advantage Greg Lehey has over the rest of us authorial sorts.) With five years fairly hardcore FreeBSD experience, tracking -current is a *pain*. At any given point in time, 90% of the system works. The 10% that doesn't changes almost daily. If you want to invest your time in finding a particular date of -current that meets your needs, and you make a management decision that you will never, never, *never* upgrade without going through the same audit, go for it. Plus, I've made a management decision to never whine about what's broken, just live with it. (Okay, I do report broken buildworlds, but that's it.) My Pilot software locks the machine up; the web browser has been known to hang forever; the web server occasionally screams obscenities; other miscellanous ports just puke. Heck, I'm waiting for this laptop to phone the police and report me as a kiddie porn devotee, then anonymously transfer my bank balance to the Linux Foundation. It'll be for a technically sound reason, I know, but that still makes it a pain. I would run unionfs on a 3-stable production box before running -current in production right now. ==ml PS: You could also make a management decision to hire a kernel hacker to work on the part of -current that you need. :) On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 10:21:47AM -0800, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 27-Mar-01 Gabriel Ambuehl wrote: > > While I'm writing this: what is the general opinion about having > > CURRENT on production servers (I'd really love to deploy the ACLs > > ASAP)? I don't plan to use SMP and can wait for snapshots til the > > RELEASE comes... > > Don't. ACL's are still not production quality yet, and the SMP work breaks UP > kernels just as bad as SMP kernels when it breaks. > > -- > > John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ > PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc > "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message -- Michael Lucas [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blackhelicopters.org/~mwlucas/ Big Scary Daemons: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/q/Big_Scary_Daemons To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: current for production?
I'm inclined to agree. I have had great luck in production boxes with FreeBSD-CURRENT, but it's not reccomended to use -CURRENT for production just because sometimes things break. :-) = | Kenneth Culver | FreeBSD: The best OS around.| | Unix Systems Administrator | ICQ #: 24767726 | | and student at The | AIM: AgRSkaterq | | The University of Maryland, | Website: (Under Construction) | | College Park. | http://www.wam.umd.edu/~culverk/| = On Mon, 20 Dec 1999, Ben Rosengart wrote: > On 20 Dec 1999, Fritz Heinrichmeyer wrote: > > > as there now is almost only talk about sound and ata drivers in this > > list, would it be adviseable to use a current-snap on a server machine > > (apache,samba,ftp) without need for sound and ata drivers (box with > > aic-scsi-only drives)? > > > > The integrated gcc-2.95.2 is so handy and current does all i want on my > > private box anyway. > > I think you'd have better luck asking people what their experiences with > the software have been, rather than asking for a recommendation. No one > is likely to want to take the responsibility of recommending -current > for a production site, but they'll be happy to share their own > experiences and let you come to your own conclusion. > > -- > Ben Rosengart > > UNIX Systems Engineer, Skunk Group > StarMedia Network, Inc. > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: current for production?
On 20 Dec 1999, Fritz Heinrichmeyer wrote: > as there now is almost only talk about sound and ata drivers in this > list, would it be adviseable to use a current-snap on a server machine > (apache,samba,ftp) without need for sound and ata drivers (box with > aic-scsi-only drives)? > > The integrated gcc-2.95.2 is so handy and current does all i want on my > private box anyway. I think you'd have better luck asking people what their experiences with the software have been, rather than asking for a recommendation. No one is likely to want to take the responsibility of recommending -current for a production site, but they'll be happy to share their own experiences and let you come to your own conclusion. -- Ben Rosengart UNIX Systems Engineer, Skunk Group StarMedia Network, Inc. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message