Re: production box: 4.9, 5.1, 5.2+ ???
> > thanks Jerry for this detailed reply. i really appreciate it. > > from what you have said i think 4.9 might be indicated. > > but i have one more question. device drivers. > > i have kind of bleeding edge sound and ethernet cards. > in fact i've already had to put in an older NIC to get 5.1 > to work as-is. i haven't tackled the on-motherboard sound > card problem yet. > > but i know freeBSD drivers are kind of behind (compared to windoz) > so would it be harder to get a bleeding driver for 4.9 than 5.2.1? Well, actually, FreeBSD is mostly up-to-date on drivers. But, there are some that are available only in 5.xx. That is one of those things that would be a feature only in 5.xx - my number 2 question in my discussion. There are supported hardware lists on the FreeBSD web site. If you look at the main home page http://www.freebsd.org/ you will see over on the right two releases listed. Under each there is a link for Hardware Notes. Check those. When it comes to video cards and mouse, you need to check the XFree86 web site for those compatibilities. That is: http://www.xfree86.org/ jerry > > tks. > > lee > > > Jerry McAllister wrote: > > >>I hesitate to ask this because it sounds stupid. > >> > >>I went down to the tech book store and bought freeBSD on CD's. > >>it happened to be 5.1. > >>I, a neophyte, assumed it was "kosher". > >> > >>I bought it and installed it on 2 machines and pretty much ok so far. > >>Now I've been reading about the STABLE and CURRENT branches > >>and cvsup and all other kinds of "keeping up". > >> > >> > > > >Unfortunately, by the time a book with CD gets published and all > >the way through the distribution chain to a bookstore, the next > >version is likely to be nearly out or already out. The CD is good > >for getting started learning about FreeBSD, but is probably old > >enough that you wouldn't want to use that version for a production > >server. > > > >So, you can install it and use cvsup to upgrade everything to the > >latest - probably a good learning exercise anyway. Or, you can > >play around with it enough to become familiar and then download > >the latest mini-ISO and start over from scratch - also a good learning > >exercise. > > > > > > > >>What I want is production boxs with of course bug fix and > >>security upgrades, but not needing always the latest app releases. > >> > >> > > > >If you are running production servers, the general word is that > >you might still want to stick with 4.xx and 4.9 is the latest > >release of the 4.xx branch. > > > >The 5.xx branch was begun to allow work on some significant and > >non-compatible changes to the system. (not everything is non-compatible, > >but some things are) Major development work is being done on the 5.xx > >branch, but the 4.xx branch continues to be upgraded, mostly now with > >bug and security fixes, but occasionaly with improved features. > > > >This will continue until the 5.xx branch is deemed solid and bullet proof > >as far as they can tell and that the new features are complete and > >everything works together. Then regular development on the 4.x branch > >will be discontinued. _Only_ security fixes and _major_ bug fixes > >will be applied to the 4.xx branch. Development of features, bug > >fixes and security fixes will then continue on the 5.xx branch, but > >not major non-compatible feature changes. It will be considered stable > >and a new branch - 6.xx will sprout which is just the latest (at that > >time) 5.xx reopened for major changes and renamed a 6.xx branch. After > >that time there will (may) be feature additions to 5.xx, as now with 4.xx, > >but those are expected to not introduce non-compatible changes. Of > >course, bug fixes and security fixes will continue to be applied as > >they will to all branches that are still being supported. The 4.xx > >branch would be supported for a while in that manner, along with 5.xx. > >In a year or two, 4.xx would no longer be supported and no longer > >get any fixes although you might be able to still apply some fixes > >with a little tinkering. > > > >There are some comments on possible 5.xx flaws in the EMail lists. > >Search the archives. The FreeBSD web site Release notes & etc > >have notes on what new features are available in 5.xx. > > > >The long and short of it is that which one you install right at this > >moment should be either 4.9 or 5.2.1 (whether you get there from > >scratch or cvsupping) and the choice depends on > > 1: is your production environment critical such that an unexpected > > flaw in the new 5.xx branch would severly hurt you. > > 2: Do you really need some feature in 5.2 that is unavailable in 4.xx. > > > >If it is yes to 1 and no to 2, then install 4.9. > >If it is no to 1 and no to 2, then it is a coin flip. Maybe 5.2.1 just > > to get in to the future or 4.9 for ease in installation and configuration. > >If it is no to 1 and yes to 2,
Re: production box: 4.9, 5.1, 5.2+ ???
> > I hesitate to ask this because it sounds stupid. > > I went down to the tech book store and bought freeBSD on CD's. > it happened to be 5.1. > I, a neophyte, assumed it was "kosher". > > I bought it and installed it on 2 machines and pretty much ok so far. > Now I've been reading about the STABLE and CURRENT branches > and cvsup and all other kinds of "keeping up". Unfortunately, by the time a book with CD gets published and all the way through the distribution chain to a bookstore, the next version is likely to be nearly out or already out. The CD is good for getting started learning about FreeBSD, but is probably old enough that you wouldn't want to use that version for a production server. So, you can install it and use cvsup to upgrade everything to the latest - probably a good learning exercise anyway. Or, you can play around with it enough to become familiar and then download the latest mini-ISO and start over from scratch - also a good learning exercise. > What I want is production boxs with of course bug fix and > security upgrades, but not needing always the latest app releases. If you are running production servers, the general word is that you might still want to stick with 4.xx and 4.9 is the latest release of the 4.xx branch. The 5.xx branch was begun to allow work on some significant and non-compatible changes to the system. (not everything is non-compatible, but some things are) Major development work is being done on the 5.xx branch, but the 4.xx branch continues to be upgraded, mostly now with bug and security fixes, but occasionaly with improved features. This will continue until the 5.xx branch is deemed solid and bullet proof as far as they can tell and that the new features are complete and everything works together. Then regular development on the 4.x branch will be discontinued. _Only_ security fixes and _major_ bug fixes will be applied to the 4.xx branch. Development of features, bug fixes and security fixes will then continue on the 5.xx branch, but not major non-compatible feature changes. It will be considered stable and a new branch - 6.xx will sprout which is just the latest (at that time) 5.xx reopened for major changes and renamed a 6.xx branch. After that time there will (may) be feature additions to 5.xx, as now with 4.xx, but those are expected to not introduce non-compatible changes. Of course, bug fixes and security fixes will continue to be applied as they will to all branches that are still being supported. The 4.xx branch would be supported for a while in that manner, along with 5.xx. In a year or two, 4.xx would no longer be supported and no longer get any fixes although you might be able to still apply some fixes with a little tinkering. There are some comments on possible 5.xx flaws in the EMail lists. Search the archives. The FreeBSD web site Release notes & etc have notes on what new features are available in 5.xx. The long and short of it is that which one you install right at this moment should be either 4.9 or 5.2.1 (whether you get there from scratch or cvsupping) and the choice depends on 1: is your production environment critical such that an unexpected flaw in the new 5.xx branch would severly hurt you. 2: Do you really need some feature in 5.2 that is unavailable in 4.xx. If it is yes to 1 and no to 2, then install 4.9. If it is no to 1 and no to 2, then it is a coin flip. Maybe 5.2.1 just to get in to the future or 4.9 for ease in installation and configuration. If it is no to 1 and yes to 2, then install 5.2.1 jerry > > I've tried to grok the release engineering and all but I don't get it. > I'm going to put freeBSD on 2 other machines as well, > but don't know whether > to install 4.9, use my 5.1 CD's (and then presumably have to > go to 5.2 + ??? to keep up?), 5.2 or what. Not to mention the > 2 already installed. > > I want to keep all 4 machines pretty much in synch. > > thanks for any clarification i can get on: > 1. which is best "production" version > 2. what is best essential upkeep mechanism (not so much for apps >but for bug fixes in OS and security fixes/patches on essential stuff >like OpenSsh) > > thanks much... > > lee > > > > > > ___ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: production box: 4.9, 5.1, 5.2+ ???
This is all very rosy commentary about 5.2, But there has been a lot of questions list traffic the last 6 weeks about 5.2 freezing up under heavy loads where the new UFS2 gets in an lockout condition. What about the nfs tasks that run all the time even when you do not select nfs during the install, or the way an recompiled kernel is installed with out the safe guards of the previous kernel being saved and the generic kernel all ways being there by default, or the bios power management problem? These things need to be addressed before moving to stable. There has been no posted fixes about these problems. 5.2 is still from the development branch and the handbook says use it at your own risk. So I guess it all depends on your definition of what production means to you, like in what your system does and how important the information on the 5.2 system is to you and how good your backups are if you have any at all. Personally I can not be an gunny pig testing an development version in my production environment, I do not have time to waste reinstalling 4.9 to get back to an stable system and all the hassle of reinstalling all my port applications. Or face my users rage over the outage 5.2 may cause. I have installed 5.2 RC1 on an stand-a-lone development box to look it over, but there are just too many obvious indications of sloppy workmanship that still need attention. It's just too big of an gamble for me. To all of you with true production systems who take the big gamble, more power to you, and good luck you brave soles. Just throwing a word of conservative caution to those who may be inclined to jump on the gunny pig wagon without full knowledge of what's at stake due to the previous rosy 5.2 posts. 4.9 is the official stable version and it has performed rock hard for me. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jez Hancock Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 8:51 PM To: lee slaughter Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: production box: 4.9, 5.1, 5.2+ ??? On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 04:40:00PM -0800, lee slaughter wrote: > thanks for any clarification i can get on: >1. which is best "production" version As already highlighted, 4.x is touted as being production quality. However there are no doubt plenty of users on this forum that use 5.x in production environments who would testify that 5.x is of production quality. >2. what is best essential upkeep mechanism (not so much for apps > but for bug fixes in OS and security fixes/patches on essential stuff > like OpenSsh) The best thing to do is to cvsup your source to the latest RELEASE branch of whichever version you decide to stick with (say 4.9), then make build|installworld to bring it up to the very latest in terms of security and other essential fixes. From this point you can then afford to ONLY apply essential security patches which are released to the freebsd-announce mailing list (make sure you're subscribed to it:P) See the handbook for more info: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cutting-ed ge.html - essential reading for what you want to do - especially: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-st able.html - which covers the subtleties between the different branches, current and stable - annoyingly RELEASE isn't mentioned on that page, not sure why - it's mentioned in the cvs-tags link below though. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvsup.html - about using cvsup to keep up to date - lengthy but good http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.h tml - about cvs tags, which you need to know about when cvsup'ing Also see the cvsup supfile examples in: /usr/src/share/examples/cvsup/ these give you a good overview of how to structure your cvsup supfile, although this is also covered in the 3rd link above. -- Jez Hancock - System Administrator / PHP Developer http://munk.nu/ http://jez.hancock-family.com/ - Another FreeBSD Diary http://ipfwstats.sf.net/- ipfw peruser traffic logging ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: production box: 4.9, 5.1, 5.2+ ???
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 04:40:00PM -0800, lee slaughter wrote: > thanks for any clarification i can get on: >1. which is best "production" version As already highlighted, 4.x is touted as being production quality. However there are no doubt plenty of users on this forum that use 5.x in production environments who would testify that 5.x is of production quality. >2. what is best essential upkeep mechanism (not so much for apps > but for bug fixes in OS and security fixes/patches on essential stuff > like OpenSsh) The best thing to do is to cvsup your source to the latest RELEASE branch of whichever version you decide to stick with (say 4.9), then make build|installworld to bring it up to the very latest in terms of security and other essential fixes. From this point you can then afford to ONLY apply essential security patches which are released to the freebsd-announce mailing list (make sure you're subscribed to it:P) See the handbook for more info: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cutting-edge.html - essential reading for what you want to do - especially: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html - which covers the subtleties between the different branches, current and stable - annoyingly RELEASE isn't mentioned on that page, not sure why - it's mentioned in the cvs-tags link below though. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvsup.html - about using cvsup to keep up to date - lengthy but good http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.html - about cvs tags, which you need to know about when cvsup'ing Also see the cvsup supfile examples in: /usr/src/share/examples/cvsup/ these give you a good overview of how to structure your cvsup supfile, although this is also covered in the 3rd link above. -- Jez Hancock - System Administrator / PHP Developer http://munk.nu/ http://jez.hancock-family.com/ - Another FreeBSD Diary http://ipfwstats.sf.net/- ipfw peruser traffic logging ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: production box: 4.9, 5.1, 5.2+ ???
lee slaughter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I hesitate to ask this because it sounds stupid. > > I went down to the tech book store and bought freeBSD on CD's. > it happened to be 5.1. I, a neophyte, assumed it was "kosher". > > I bought it and installed it on 2 machines and pretty much ok so far. > Now I've been reading about the STABLE and CURRENT branches > and cvsup and all other kinds of "keeping up". > > What I want is production boxs with of course bug fix and > security upgrades, but not needing always the latest app releases. > > I've tried to grok the release engineering and all but I don't get it. > I'm going to put freeBSD on 2 other machines as well, > but don't know whether > to install 4.9, use my 5.1 CD's (and then presumably have to > go to 5.2 + ??? to keep up?), 5.2 or what. Not to mention the > 2 already installed. > > I want to keep all 4 machines pretty much in synch. > > thanks for any clarification i can get on: > 1. which is best "production" version > 2. what is best essential upkeep mechanism (not so much for apps >but for bug fixes in OS and security fixes/patches on essential stuff >like OpenSsh) > > thanks much... If 5.1 is already installed and working for you, I'd stick with it. I would recommend tracking RELENG_5_2, the 5.2 security branch (and later versions as they come along), but going back to 4.x isn't likely to make your systems any more stable, given that they're already working fine. I would definitely recommend keeping your systems running the same version as each other. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: production box: 4.9, 5.1, 5.2+ ???
> I hesitate to ask this because it sounds stupid. its not that stupid a question. i've asked worse. use 4.9 definitely for production, it is the most stable at the moment, by stable we mean tested. try reading the handbook, about the part on creating a custom kernel. or you can download the 4.9 isos (or any other isos for that matter) from http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/mirrors-ftp.html read the handbook dude. its worth it. rommel ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
production box: 4.9, 5.1, 5.2+ ???
I hesitate to ask this because it sounds stupid. I went down to the tech book store and bought freeBSD on CD's. it happened to be 5.1. I, a neophyte, assumed it was "kosher". I bought it and installed it on 2 machines and pretty much ok so far. Now I've been reading about the STABLE and CURRENT branches and cvsup and all other kinds of "keeping up". What I want is production boxs with of course bug fix and security upgrades, but not needing always the latest app releases. I've tried to grok the release engineering and all but I don't get it. I'm going to put freeBSD on 2 other machines as well, but don't know whether to install 4.9, use my 5.1 CD's (and then presumably have to go to 5.2 + ??? to keep up?), 5.2 or what. Not to mention the 2 already installed. I want to keep all 4 machines pretty much in synch. thanks for any clarification i can get on: 1. which is best "production" version 2. what is best essential upkeep mechanism (not so much for apps but for bug fixes in OS and security fixes/patches on essential stuff like OpenSsh) thanks much... lee ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
