The case for FreeBSD

[James Snow]

On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 10:39:22AM -0500, Steve Ames wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 05:40:32AM -0900, Andy Firman wrote:
> > 
> > Your comments are disturbing.  I run a few 4.10 servers and am getting ready
> > for a couple new ones and would like to go with 5.3 stable.
> 
> For a while 5.X was pretty iffy. A number of people who tried it at that
> time are still stuck with that impression. IMHO, its unjustified.

I hate to post a "me too" but I feel compelled to offer my wholehearted
agreement with this statement.

I installed a number of 5.3-R machines at my old place of employment.
They remain the most stable machines in the company by far.

At home I run a 5.3-R machine with a RAID3 volume and a 5.3-STABLE
machine with two RAID1 volumes - one of them bootable. Both machines
have been flawless with the exception of some bad RAM; obviously not
FreeBSD's fault.

YMMV, but I've been running 5.x since one of the RCs and I've never had
a problem that wasn't my own fault in some way.


-Snow