Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 04:51:13 -0600 From: Nikolas Britton <freebsd@nbritton.org> To: Adam <adam@jamradar.com> Cc: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_5 vs. RELENG_5_3 Message-ID: <41BEC5A1.2040302@nbritton.org> In-Reply-To: <008d01c4e1a7$e3b8e5b0$0200a8c0@PANASONIULSWMR> References: <003b01c4e19c$c1a54c80$0200a8c0@PANASONIULSWMR> <41BE8303.5060401@nbritton.org> <008d01c4e1a7$e3b8e5b0$0200a8c0@PANASONIULSWMR>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Adam wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Nikolas Britton" <freebsd@nbritton.org> >To: "Adam" <adam@jamradar.com> >Cc: <freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org> >Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 12:06 AM >Subject: Re: RELENG_5 vs. RELENG_5_3 > > > > >>Adam wrote: >> >> >> >>>So if I cvsup with RELENG_5, and I'm currently running version 5.3, will >>> >>> >I'll be getting the new code that will eventually become FreeBSD 5.4? > > >>>If I update with RELENG_5_3, and I'm currently running version 5.3, will >>> >>> >I just get critical updates and security fixes for FreeBSD 5.3? > > >>>Thanks >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>Yes, everything you said is correct. >> >>If you cvsup with RELENG_6 you will be tracking -CURRENT (aka HEAD), >>NEVER! a good idea for a newbie. >> >>If you cvsup with RELENG_5 you will be tracking -STABLE, -STABLE does >>NOT imply the code is "Stable", only that there won't be radical changes >>to the code, that is what -CURRENT is for, I would not recommend >>tracking this for 5.x until it matures a bit more, maybe after 5.4 or >>5.5-RELEASE and even after it stabilizes tracking -STABLE is not >>recommend for "production systems", Think of it as "Beta" software. >> >>If you cvsup with RELENG_5_3 you will be tracking the -RELEASE branch >>for that -RELEASE, this will get you critical and security updates, this >>is what you want. Also some -RELEASE branches are designated as errata >>fix branches. Then when 5.4 is released you would change it to >>RELENG_5_4 and cvsup to 5.4. >> >>See here for more about Release Engineering: >>http://www.freebsd.org/releng/index.html >> >> > >With FreeBSD I'm making a webserver (with PHP, Apache, PostgreSQL) for my >pesonal websites and I want it to be "stable" (as in the sense that it's >reliable). Is FreeBSD 5.3 tracking RELENG_5_3 a good choice for this? Or >should I go to an earlier version? > >Thanks, > > > YES!, Its still a tad ruff around the edges but you have to remember that FreeBSD (and the other BSDs) has very high standards when it comes to system stability, uptime is measured in years not months or days, so if they say its ready for production use then it is, also, FreeBSD 5.x as a chicken and the egg problem, it needs more people using it to work out those ruff edges, but everyone "thinks" it not "ready" so they go with 4.x thus adding to problem. Being that FreeBSD 5 is already at 5.3 were sorta at the now or never point, its time for everyone to just grin and bear it so we can get this show on the road. If you don't believe me that FreeBSD works like "running water" then have a look at this, all 50 spots are held by *BSD: http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41BEC5A1.2040302>