I am currently running FBSD 8.3-STABLE on a production server that
provides http, dns, smtp, and so on for a small domain. This is not
a high arrival rate environment but it does need to be rock solid (which
FBSD 4-8 have been).
I am contemplating moving to the FBSD 9 family. Is this branch
On 2012.11.24 17:38, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
I am contemplating moving to the FBSD 9 family. Is this branch ready
for production or should I wait a while yet?
This probably won't help much, but I wouldn't call any system
production ready until I've tested it as thoroughly as possible and
On 11/24/2012 11:19 AM, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
I wouldn't
blindly trust and drop an operating system on production servers, no
matter how good the feedback from outside my organization sounds.
In general, I'd agree with you. Certainly, that's been the case
with Linux, AIX, and so on over the
Tim Daneliuk tun...@tundraware.com writes:
On 11/24/2012 11:19 AM, Lucas B. Cohen wrote:
I wouldn't
blindly trust and drop an operating system on production servers, no
matter how good the feedback from outside my organization sounds.
In general, I'd agree with you. Certainly, that's been
On 24/11/2012 16:38, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
I am contemplating moving to the FBSD 9 family. Is this branch ready
for production or should I wait a while yet? I ordinarily avoid x.0
releases of anything and I know 9.1 is soon going to be with us.
9-STABLE works for me. I've run into a few quite
On 11/24/2012 03:48 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
It is not however sufficient to get you a completely upgraded system:
you will still have to re-install all of your ports. Otherwise, as you
end up trying to upgrade ports by ones and twos over time, you'll end up
with a complete rat's nest of
Hi,
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 10:38:35 -0600
Tim Daneliuk tun...@tundraware.com wrote:
I am currently running FBSD 8.3-STABLE on a production server that
provides http, dns, smtp, and so on for a small domain. This is not
a high arrival rate environment but it does need to be rock solid
(which
On 25/11/2012 04:06, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
But I have had essentially no problems doing in-place major rev
updates with FreeBSD thus far. The only breakage I am worried about
now is whether the new compiler change breaks things that used to
work just fine. For example, will my make.conf
On 11/24/2012 05:58 PM, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 10:38:35 -0600
Tim Daneliuk tun...@tundraware.com wrote:
I am currently running FBSD 8.3-STABLE on a production server that
provides http, dns, smtp, and so on for a small domain. This is not
a high arrival rate
On 11/24/2012 06:16 PM, Shane Ambler wrote:
On 25/11/2012 04:06, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
But I have had essentially no problems doing in-place major rev
updates with FreeBSD thus far. The only breakage I am worried about
now is whether the new compiler change breaks things that used to
work just
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 11/24/2012 03:48 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
It is not however sufficient to get you a completely upgraded system:
you will still have to re-install all of your ports. Otherwise, as you
end up trying to upgrade ports by ones and twos over time, you'll
--On November 24, 2012 10:38:35 AM -0600 Tim Daneliuk
tun...@tundraware.com wrote:
I am currently running FBSD 8.3-STABLE on a production server that
provides http, dns, smtp, and so on for a small domain. This is not
a high arrival rate environment but it does need to be rock solid (which
On 24 November 2012, at 16:36, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 11/24/2012 05:58 PM, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 10:38:35 -0600
Tim Daneliuk tun...@tundraware.com wrote:
I am currently running FBSD 8.3-STABLE on a production server that
provides http, dns, smtp, and so on for
13 matches
Mail list logo
