> Well, I still see complains about a few quirks in 9 here in the list, > specially after certain src updates.
> Re:Use of C99 extra long double math functions after r236148 > Re: kern/168190: [pf] panic when using pf and route-to (maybe: bad fragment > handling?) > Re: ULE/sched issues on stable/9 - why isn't preemption occurring? > Etc .. > To me, something like pf (specially route-to!) is critical and for the moment, > I wouldn't touch my rock-solid-down-to-the-micro-second perfect production > firewall 8-STABLE server for nothing, if the aim is such a role. > I think that distribution set size is just not a very strong argument. > OTOH, if the aim is just experimenting, that's another story. > -- > Mario Lobo > http://www.mallavoodoo.com.br > FreeBSD since 2.2.8 [not Pro-Audio.... YET!!] (99% winblows FREE) _______________________________________________ I suppose if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I have FreeBSD 8.2_RELEASE i386 on an old computer, pinched for disk space and only 256 MB RAM, won't try upgrading in place. On the new computer, after not being able to boot NetBSD most of the time and never getting to a graphical interface, FreeBSD 9.0-BETA1 was released, and I downloaded and installed that: a dream compared to NetBSD which didn't really like the new hardware. I never used the old computer as a server. For a server, you don't need a lot of fancy stuff such as Adobe Flash and other multimedia functionality, nor do you need a lot of RAM. Tom _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
