Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 22:01:48 +0100 From: "Christoph P. Kukulies" <kuku@kukulies.org> To: Michael Reifenberger <root@reifenberger.com> Cc: freebsd-isdn@freebsd.org Subject: Re: how dangerous would it be to switch to 5.1-current? Message-ID: <20031118210148.GA98520@gilberto.physik.rwth-aachen.de> In-Reply-To: <20031118223226.T17712@nihil.reifenberger.com> References: <200311181733.hAIHXN4X096374@www.kukulies.org> <20031118223226.T17712@nihil.reifenberger.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 10:36:39PM +0100, Michael Reifenberger wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, C. Kukulies wrote:
>
> > Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:33:23 +0100 (CET)
> > From: C. Kukulies <kuku@www.kukulies.org>
> > To: freebsd-isdn@freebsd.org
> > Subject: how dangerous would it be to switch to 5.1-current?
> >
> > With a gateway machine that runs 4.8 stable I'm considering to
> > switch to 5.1-current (cvsup) at the danger of being off-net
> > after the upgrade. Should I?
> >
>
> Too dangerous.
> If you ask this question ('cause you havn't tried), you shouldn't upgrade.
> At least not to -current. Maybe RELENG_4.
Well, I have gone through a couple of such situations in the past since
386bsd :-)
It's just the question whether i4b still works or works again
under -current. Under 5.0 there were problems due to timer changes
in the kernel.
Is anybody running i4b under -current?
--
Chris Christoph P. U. Kukulies kuku_at_physik.rwth-aachen.de
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031118210148.GA98520>