Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:44:07 -0500 From: Vulpes Velox <v.velox@vvelox.net> To: Marc Olzheim <marcolz@stack.nl> Cc: Buelow <mkb@incubus.de>, Matthias, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.4: Is it generally unstable? Message-ID: <20050608224407.430b92ee@vixen42.local.lan> In-Reply-To: <20050608180428.GA42445@stack.nl> References: <20050608001306.3FB1F43D5C@mx1.FreeBSD.org> <42A6C7CE.9000002@incubus.de> <200506080908.02478.fcash@ocis.net> <42A71AE1.8020300@incubus.de> <6.2.1.2.0.20050608134054.06b8ccb0@64.7.153.2> <20050608180428.GA42445@stack.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 20:04:28 +0200 Marc Olzheim <marcolz@stack.nl> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 01:42:45PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > >I remember 5.2.1 panicking left and right, on several machines, > > >it was completely unusable. Maybe we just live in different > > >universes. > > > > Me too, but a lot has changed since 5.2.1 which at the time was I > > think was called a preview. The topic is 5.4R. What parts of > > the OS do you feel are not production ready as compared to 4.X ? > > Personnally, when upgrading from 4.x to 5.x, we ran into the > following 3 issues that are still not fixed in 5.4: > > kern/80617: > Hangup writing large blocks to NFS mounted FS (Patches available) > Not exremely important: just don't do that. > > kern/79208: > i387 libm's floorf(), ceilf() and truncf() (Fixed in RELENG_5) > PITA when running threaded calculations. > > kern/78824 > socketpair()/close() race condition (Fixed in CURRENT) > Patch will be MFC'd to RELENG_5 soon. > > Anyway: you won't catch me running an unpatched 5.4 system... I'd > say stick with RELENG_5 for the time being. Given the choice, I can't see any reason not to run a system that is not using the current stable.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050608224407.430b92ee>