Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:37:50 -0700
From:      "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC" <chad@shire.net>
To:        Steve Bertrand <iaccounts@ibctech.ca>
Cc:        FreeBSD Questions <questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Release engineering confusion
Message-ID:  <686CF7E8-B32A-49B7-9462-5E031BD0E7F2@shire.net>
In-Reply-To: <20051117001903.08B0043D55@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
References:  <20051117001903.08B0043D55@mx1.FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Nov 16, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote:

>
>>> In production (at an ISP), what is the best to
>> follow...RELENGX_X or
>>> RELENG_X? I have 4.x, 5.x boxes in production, and this 6.x box is
>>> being prepared for the same.
>>
>> See the Handbook:
>>
>> 20.2.2.2 Who Needs FreeBSD-STABLE?
>
> Thank you. However, that entire page out of the handbook pretty much
> clarifies that a production environment should *not* track either  
> STABLE
> or CURRENT.
>
> So I'm assuming I'm best off with RELENG_6_0 etc, etc? Does anyone  
> here
> actually run STABLE or CURRENT in a production environment? I've
> personally had the most luck with RELENG_4 which is still my main box,
> but now my curiosity has got the best of me.


I generally track -RELEASE but my production boxes are currently at  
5.4-STABLE from a while ago since there was an issue I was trying to  
fix and was hoping someone had put a patch in to fix whatever my  
issue was :-)  My issue has not shown up since and my boxes have been  
working fine.

But in general I play it conservative and track -RELEASE

Chad

---
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC
Your Web App and Email hosting provider
chad@shire.net





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?686CF7E8-B32A-49B7-9462-5E031BD0E7F2>