From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 22 06:22:35 2003 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 B6CC237B430 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 06:22:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from clunix.cl.msu.edu (clunix.cl.msu.edu [35.9.2.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08D5543F75 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 06:22:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jerrymc@clunix.cl.msu.edu) Received: from clunix.cl.msu.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clunix.cl.msu.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h6MDMWOg021127; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 09:22:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from jerrymc@localhost) by clunix.cl.msu.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h6MDMVsY021126; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 09:22:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Jerry McAllister Message-Id: <200307221322.h6MDMVsY021126@clunix.cl.msu.edu> To: drio@perpels.com (David Rio) Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 09:22:31 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20030721221840.GB58118@perpels.com> from "David Rio" at Jul 22, 2003 12:18:40 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_5 ? 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: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 13:22:36 -0000 > > Hi all: > > I have been using FreeBSD in production enviroments so I used FreeBSD 4.7 > and 4.8. > Now, I have installed FreeBSD 5.1 on my laptop. > So I decided to keep track of the -RELEASE_5 (STABLE). But It seems that > there is not such a branch on the repository. > Reading diferent links at freebsd.org. It seems that there is only two > branchs for 5.1: > > -CURRENT > -RELENG_5_1 > > The first one, I think can be a very agresive for my intentions. The second > one, instead, will not modify my sources to improve the performace because > it is a patch branch. > > If I am not wrong with this, what will be the reason to install 5.1 instead > of 4.8? I mean, 5.1 has more features but a worst performace that 4.8. You seem to give the answer to this question right within the question. The reason to run 5.1 is if you want to try out the new features and be a part of the development in some way. The reason to stick with 4.8 is if you want a high performance system/server running right now. If you choose 5.1, you will have to be willing to accept its present limited status. It seems to be getting close, but it ain't ready to be a supported "stable branch" yet. The documentation says this quite clearly. ////jerry > > Thanks in advance. >