Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 10 Jan 2000 23:46:37 +1100
From:      Jonathan Michaels <jon@welearn.com.au>
To:        Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: When does the 4.x branch go stable?
Message-ID:  <20000110234635.A21865@phoenix.welearn.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <v04220803b49f5b4cd62c@[195.238.19.252]>; from Brad Knowles on Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 10:48:07AM %2B0100
References:  <Pine.A41.4.10.10001091547130.91952-100000@dante24.u.washington.edu> <20000109235744.01C49A54EE@netcom1.netcom.com> <v04220803b49f5b4cd62c@[195.238.19.252]>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
all,

please excuse my slightly longish post, i'm looking at two
issues here. i've finally come to terms with what "tracking
-stable" actually is and what it means for me.

i'm almost ready to cutover to springing for the cvsup version
of kernel updating as opposed to the get the new -release cdrom
and copy the new stuff over ... grin.

On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 10:48:07AM +0100, Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 3:57 PM -0800 on 2000/1/9, Mike Harding wrote:
> 
> >  mmm - I guess I am ready to go to 4.x in general, just wondering when
> >  it would be 'safe'.  This is for my home system and I would prefer to
> >  do a source code update in place...

how safe would a -release 'upgrade' be ? then a migration to a
-stable track a bit further down the line ?

i've found the best  way to upgrade was to take the hot backup
server, clean off the hard disk media do a fresh install of the
newer operating system, reconfigure the  various bits, add the
required packages and then let it sit freewheeling for a few
days or about a week.

after no hiccups i cut over the services one at a time, till i
have it all cutover and working .. then i take a dump onto tape
and restore this to the former 'hot' server, which now becomes
the new hot backup server. i'm lucky in that i only need one
a pair of hosts to take my entire workload.

just  to digress a little, after i take on the tracking of
-stable, this hot baackup server  could serve as an
installation server and the 'official' -stable tracker from
which i could roll my as required freebsd editions. or am i
needlessly complicating my working environemnt so that i could
just track -stable .. i'm only wanting to track the kernal
sources and some  of the base systems toolkits as supplied with
the basic 'kernel builders' installation option from the
sysinstall menu.

> 	I've been watching the -current mailing list for a while now, and 
> what I currently see is that -CURRENT has a few niggling outstanding 
> problems (especially on older hardware), and a few pretty major 
> outstanding problems.

what  sort of hardware problems, please ?
 
not architectural, or as  regards old i386dx style, or i486dx
style motherboards and thier atendant isa buss structures.

my couple are running very well with 2.2.7-release, but sooner
or latter i wll need to get  on board a more recent freebsd, if
for no other reason than for teh inherant security weakness
that have been fixed over  the last year or so. also, i have a
few adaptec aha1542b's that are running very well, some of teh
newer stuff is .... those small and fragile pci buss cards tend
to get damaged quickly if not handled correctly, my hands are
not a agile as they used  to be is what i'm getting at here.

anway cheers

warm regards

jonathan

-- 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000110234635.A21865>