Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 19:36:13 +0100 From: Daniela <dgw@liwest.at> To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Lots of kernel core dumps Message-ID: <200303261936.13694.dgw@liwest.at> In-Reply-To: <20030325071418.GA16046@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> References: <200303212037.46322.dgw@liwest.at> <200303242018.43648.dgw@liwest.at> <20030325071418.GA16046@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 25 March 2003 08:14, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 08:18:43PM +0100, Daniela wrote: > >Well, it's just a home server. I don't mind a few crashes, but securit= y is > >important for me. What do you think, should I go back to -stable? > > If you're willing to put up with a few crashes _and_ assist with > debugging the crashes (eg trying patches) then running -CURRENT would > help the Project. One option you could try is to stick with -CURRENT > for a month or two and see how it pans out - if you feel it's too > painful, downgrade to -STABLE. (I ran -CURRENT on my main workstation > for about 3 years - I dropped back to -STABLE midway through last year > because -CURRENT happened to strike an extended period of instability > and it was causing me too much angst). > > On the topic of security, you should be aware that -CURRENT is not > officially supported and therefore isn't mentioned in security > advisories - in general -CURRENT will have security patches applied > before -STABLE but you will need to do some detective work if you > want to identify the exact time/revision affected. There have also > been a couple of instances where security problems only affected > -CURRENT. In short, if I keep my eyes open, security isn't bad, right? I'll give -current a try, thanks for your advice. Daniela
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200303261936.13694.dgw>