From owner-freebsd-stable Wed May 26 14:59:17 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from rio.i-plus.net (rio.i-plus.net [209.100.20.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F24B157B1 for ; Wed, 26 May 1999 14:59:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from st@i-Plus.net) Received: from localhost (st@localhost) by rio.i-plus.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA23950; Wed, 26 May 1999 17:59:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 17:59:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Troy Settle To: Mike Meyer Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Q] How stable is FreeBSD 3.X ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 26 May 1999, Mike Meyer wrote: > > With FreeBSD: > > > > cd /usr/src > > cvsup supfile > > make buildworld && make installworld && reboot > > ... find machine dead, reboot from fixit disk, resup, ... :-) Note the syntax... it won't install unless the build succeeds. It won't reboot unless both build and install succeed. I generally only do that whole thing when bringing a new server up. On production boxes, I'm *much* more careful. Both cases, I've not had a problem yet. (I also run that stuff in the background, sending the output from build and install into respective log files for later review). > > > I'd expect installing a service pack to be a lot more painfull than > > > installing a patch, much as installing an application on Windows 9x is > > > a lot more painfull than doing so on a Unix box (Does WNT require a > > > system reboot on every application install like Windows 9x?). > > Windows is braindamaged beyond repair. You don't *need* to reboot after > > sneezing, but it is reccomended. > > Which goes along with reinstalling to cure anything. But what about > WNT? Meant Windows in general. 3.x/95/98/NT/2k/etc. Though NT4 Server and Win2k are actually pretty OK on networking stuff, not needing a reboot for a DNS change. > > > All in all, it's a pretty nice development structure compared to what I > > know of other vendors. > > It's different. Which is causes people to get confused about what to > expect. True... it took me a good 6 months to really get into it. Many times I wanted to go back to linux (once, I even got as far as installing slackware). But, I kept saying to myself that linux would be a nightmare 10x worse. > > > Do any of the commercial FreeBSD support organizations run a seperate > > > branch and bundle patches up for their customers? > > > > Like what Red Hat does for Linux? No Thank You. > > Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not for everybody. I > can see that a commercial ISP might prefer a system where they fed > someone else money, and got 1) security patches, and 2) fixes for bugs > they encountered. It certainly makes pointy-haired managers happy if > they can spend money on something like that. Not *all* managers are like that. Our head honcho just about creamed himself when I told him that I could build an ISP for the cost of hardware and little to nothing on software. Having someone/somewhere to point fingers at can be a good thing in some companies. Having commercial support for the platform your business depends on is comforting to most management types. -- Troy Settle iPlus Internet Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message