At 08:09 PM 5/21/2006, Kris Kennaway wrote:
We did ourselves a big disservice by not pointing out clearly in the
todo list that most of the listed problems are VERY RARE and are
unlikely to affect most/all users. In future we're going to have to
be clearer about that, because you're not the
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 01:22:59PM +0300, Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote:
Hello!
On Tue, 16 May 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
Personally, since FreeBSD 4.11 will reach its EoL about 8 months
from now, and the 4.x-[56].x upgrade path is non-trivial, I
recommend installing FreeBSD 6.1 instead.
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 07:35:53PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
Is there a server currently furnishing snapshots of the FreeBSD 4.11 security
branch? We have some servers running various 4.x versions that might not be
happy with 6.x due to memory requirements. They also might have slower file
Well, y'know, if they could release a FreeBSD 2.2.9 (as was done last month), it
shouldn't be a problem to do a 4.12 release as a last gasp to tide us over
until September. (Hopefully, Colin and the summer of code folks can
work on performance enhancements to the network stack, UFS2, and the hard
On Sun, 2006-May-21 13:20:24 -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
Well, y'know, if they could release a FreeBSD 2.2.9 (as was done last month),
it
shouldn't be a problem to do a 4.12 release as a last gasp to tide us over
Maybe for April 1st next year - though novel April Fools Day jokes are
always much
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 01:20:24PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
Well, y'know, if they could release a FreeBSD 2.2.9 (as was done last month),
it
shouldn't be a problem to do a 4.12 release as a last gasp to tide us over
until September. (Hopefully, Colin and the summer of code folks can
work
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:03:33AM +1200, Andrew Thompson wrote:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 01:20:24PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
Well, y'know, if they could release a FreeBSD 2.2.9 (as was done last
month), it
shouldn't be a problem to do a 4.12 release as a last gasp to tide us
over
You could build your own snapshots It's not hard (hint 'man release').
Seth
Brett Glass wrote:
Is there a server currently furnishing snapshots of the FreeBSD 4.11 security
branch? We have some servers running various 4.x versions that might not be
happy with 6.x due to memory
Hello!
On Tue, 16 May 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
Personally, since FreeBSD 4.11 will reach its EoL about 8 months
from now, and the 4.x-[56].x upgrade path is non-trivial, I
recommend installing FreeBSD 6.1 instead.
Well, have you seen my simple performance benchmarking RELENG_4 vs 6?
Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote:
Well, have you seen my simple performance benchmarking RELENG_4 vs 6?
IMHO it mimics quote common usage pattern: it just downloads a large file
with 10Mbps rate and stores it on UFS filesystem. On the same hardware
(i386 uniprocessor Celeron-333 system with 128Mb
Hello!
On Wed, 17 May 2006, Dimitry Andric wrote:
(INVARIANTS removed) RELENG_6 (and 5) _still_ uses = 50% of CPU time
for (Intr+Sys), while RELENG_4 doesn't use more than 28% for them.
Just as a test for RELENG_6, could you try setting kern.hz=100 in your
loader.conf, and repeating your
Plamen Stoev wrote:
Brett Glass wrote:
At 08:42 PM 5/15/2006, pete wright wrote:
according to this link 4.11 is a supported errata branch:
http://www.freebsd.org/releng/
here is a link to the errata policy:
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.11R/errata_policy.html
you should be able
At 09:19 AM 5/16/2006, Randy Rowe wrote:
Also at the bottom of that page under the FAQ heading it spells out
where to get the older snapshots :-)
Alas, those snapshots are old indeed. The latest is from August of last
year! There does not seem to be a snapshot of the 4.11 security branch
If you absolutely must run FreeBSD 4.11, install the RELEASE and
then run FreeBSD Update.
Personally, since FreeBSD 4.11 will reach its EoL about 8 months
from now, and the 4.x-[56].x upgrade path is non-trivial, I
recommend installing FreeBSD 6.1 instead.
Colin Percival
Colin:
We'd like to. But we need the servers we're building to outperform
Linux in file and database operations, and they only do that under
4.11.
Also, the 6.1 release engineering page showed some worrisome
problems -- including such things as potential problems with the
Intel fxp and em
Is there a server currently furnishing snapshots of the FreeBSD 4.11 security
branch? We have some servers running various 4.x versions that might not be
happy with 6.x due to memory requirements. They also might have slower file
access (The file system in FreeBSD 6.x still isn't as snappy as the
On 5/15/06, Brett Glass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a server currently furnishing snapshots of the FreeBSD 4.11 security
branch? We have some servers running various 4.x versions that might not be
happy with 6.x due to memory requirements. They also might have slower file
access (The file
At 08:42 PM 5/15/2006, pete wright wrote:
according to this link 4.11 is a supported errata branch:
http://www.freebsd.org/releng/
here is a link to the errata policy:
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.11R/errata_policy.html
you should be able to sync your source via cvsup from official
18 matches
Mail list logo
