Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:05:29 GMT From: pmc@citylink.dinoex.sub.org (Peter Much) To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Rel 7 works better (was: "s/stable/broken/g") Message-ID: <KI7BD5.1K5@citylink.dinoex.sub.org> References: <Jy5EA6.1n3@citylink.dinoex.sub.org> <200803261404.00508.fjwcash@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi folks, hi Freddy, sorry, missed Your note last year this time. <fjwcash@gmail.com> aka Freddie Cash schrieb mit Datum Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:04:00 -0700 in m2n.fbsd.stable: |On March 22, 2008 01:01 pm Peter Much wrote: |> Both of them were running Release 5.5, and they were doing all that |> is needed, and I was perfectly happy with this. |> [...] |> So I upgraded the first computer to Release 6.3. The outcome was | |A safer (recommended?) upgrade process when crossing major versions (ie |5.x to 6.x) is to upgrade to the latest release of the "old" version, |then to the .0 release of the "new" version, then to the latest release |of the "new" version. | |So from 5.x to 5.5, then from 5.5 to 6.0, then from 6.0 to 6.3. | |The devs take great pains to make the transition from "latest X.x to Y.0" |simple and mostly fool-proof, and the transition from "Y.x to Y.z" simple |and mostly fool-proof. But there are no guarantees when going from X.x |to Y.z. Maybe its good idea to replay Your message just now, as it seems good advice. I'm just strolling by to tell that I went from 6.3 to 7.2 just now with my testmachine, and this time it was a really good experience so far. I have now only one strangeness, which I think not worth a bug report, but I would invite You to think about what that can be. I post a separate note with better subject for that. And yes, I did ignore the good advice again, but 7.2 isn't officially out for release yet, so there are no safety belts anyway. rgds, PMc
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?KI7BD5.1K5>