On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:02:54 -0700, Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Oddly enough, most FreeBSD sysadmins don't appear to mind doing things much >more invasive than a dist-upgrade, every six months. This has largely to do >with the fact that most upgrades are very smooth, and don't require, say, a >complete reinstall.
Oddly enough, nobody at me ex-orkplace (having about 20 FreeBSD boxes in productive use) dared to touch any of the BSD boxes. We had productive Servers running FreeBSD 2.x, and I believe that this hasn't changed. >In this regard, Debian actually resembles the *BSDs much more closely than >most other Linux distributions (and that isn't a bad thing). NACK. Debian is much easier to upgrade since we keep older versions around. Updating older FreeBSD base systems should work fine, but compiling new ports is a nightmare if you can't step up one release at a time. The only thing you can safely do is to build new systems and slowly migrate. Debian is much better in that regard. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Karlsruhe, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | Fon: *49 721 966 32 15 Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fax: *49 721 966 31 29