From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 25 20:03:55 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F38816A4CE for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:03:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from internet.potentialtech.com (h-66-167-251-6.phlapafg.covad.net [66.167.251.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EEEA43D5D for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:03:55 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from working.potentialtech.com (pa-plum-cmts1e-68-68-113-64.pittpa.adelphia.net [68.68.113.64]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by internet.potentialtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C1C769A8C; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:03:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:03:52 -0400 From: Bill Moran To: Curtis Vaughan Message-Id: <20040825160352.0ba81902.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: References: <412CE466.1010505@daleco.biz> Organization: Potential Technologies X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.9) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4.8 > 4.10 successful. Now > 5.x? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:03:55 -0000 Curtis Vaughan wrote: > On 25 Aug, 2004, at 12:11, Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P. wrote: > > > Curtis Vaughan wrote: > > > >> Ok, it looks as though cvsup from 4.8 to 4.10 has been successful. > >> > >> Now, first off I want to say that I want this server to be a second > >> Postfix / Courier IMAP server (our other is on a RedHat server, but > >> that's irrelevant). > >> > >> I feel that I should go ahead and first upgrade to 5.x and then > >> install Postfix and everything else I will need (e.g., PAM/LDAP > >> authentication, user folders, Samba, etc.). Otherwise, I'm afraid I > >> stop at 4.10 and install all the applications I need, then when I > >> really want to upgrade to 5.x I may find myself in trouble. But I am > >> interested in what the rest of you think. > >> > >> Curtis > > > > > > For various reasons, most of us mere mortals are advised > > to simply backup and install 5.x to a new disk (or a cleaned > > one, anyway). > > > > I started to say why ... I find that I can make a list of new > > features in 5.x, but am not necessarily aware of which > > features make a complete reinstallation desirable. I do > > know that you can't use ufs2 unless you reinstall.... > > > > Kevin Kinsey > > > So, which of the 5.x should I install? 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.3? > > I want to be as Stable as possible. If you work with 5.3-BETA1, you'll be as close as possible to what 5.3-STABLE will be, thus giving you the easiest upgrade path in the future. However, I second the opinion that you'd be better off installing 5.3-BETA1 from scratch. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com