production box: 4.9, 5.1, 5.2+ ???

[Jerry McAllister]

> 
> thanks Jerry for this detailed reply.  i really appreciate it.
> 
> from what you have said i think 4.9  might  be indicated.
> 
> but i have one more question.  device drivers.
> 
> i have kind of bleeding edge sound and ethernet cards.
> in fact i've already had to put in an older NIC to get 5.1
> to work as-is.  i haven't tackled the on-motherboard sound
> card problem yet.
> 
> but i know freeBSD drivers are kind of behind (compared to windoz)
> so would it be harder to get a bleeding driver for 4.9 than 5.2.1?

Well, actually, FreeBSD is mostly up-to-date on drivers.
But, there are some that are available only in 5.xx.   That is
one of those things that would be a feature only in 5.xx - my 
number 2 question in my discussion.

There are supported hardware lists on the FreeBSD web site.
If you look at the main home page  http://www.freebsd.org/
you will see over on the right two releases listed.   Under each
there is a link for Hardware Notes.   Check those.

When it comes to video cards and mouse, you need to check the XFree86 
web site for those compatibilities.  That is: http://www.xfree86.org/

////jerry

> 
> tks.
> 
> lee
> 
> 
> Jerry McAllister wrote:
> 
> >>I hesitate to ask this because it sounds stupid.
> >>
> >>I went down to the tech book store and bought freeBSD on CD's.
> >>it happened to be 5.1. 
> >>I, a neophyte, assumed it was "kosher".
> >>
> >>I bought it and installed it on 2 machines  and pretty much ok so far.
> >>Now I've been reading about the STABLE and CURRENT branches
> >>and cvsup and all other kinds of "keeping up".
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Unfortunately, by the time a book with CD gets published and all
> >the way through the distribution chain to a bookstore, the next
> >version is likely to be nearly out or already out.  The CD is good
> >for getting started learning about FreeBSD, but is probably old
> >enough that you wouldn't want to use that version for a production
> >server.   
> >
> >So, you can install it and use cvsup to upgrade everything to the
> >latest - probably a good learning exercise anyway.   Or, you can
> >play around with it enough to become familiar and then download
> >the latest mini-ISO and start over from scratch - also a good learning
> >exercise.   
> >
> >  
> >
> >>What I want is production boxs with of course bug fix and
> >>security upgrades, but not needing always the latest app releases.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >If you are running production servers, the general word is that
> >you might still want to stick with 4.xx and 4.9 is the latest
> >release of the 4.xx branch.   
> >
> >The 5.xx branch was begun to allow work on some significant and 
> >non-compatible changes to the system.  (not everything is non-compatible, 
> >but some things are)  Major development work is being done on the 5.xx 
> >branch, but the 4.xx branch continues to be upgraded, mostly now with 
> >bug and security fixes, but occasionaly with improved features.   
> >
> >This will continue until the 5.xx branch is deemed solid and bullet proof 
> >as far as they can tell and that the new features are complete and
> >everything works together.   Then regular development on the 4.x branch
> >will be discontinued.   _Only_ security fixes and _major_ bug fixes
> >will be applied to the 4.xx branch.   Development of features, bug
> >fixes and security fixes will then continue on the 5.xx branch, but
> >not major non-compatible feature changes.   It will be considered stable
> >and a new branch - 6.xx will sprout which is just the latest (at that 
> >time) 5.xx reopened for major changes and renamed a 6.xx branch.  After
> >that time there will (may) be feature additions to 5.xx, as now with 4.xx,
> >but those are expected to not introduce non-compatible changes.  Of
> >course, bug fixes and security fixes will continue to be applied as
> >they will to all branches that are still being supported.   The 4.xx
> >branch would be supported for a while in that manner, along with 5.xx.
> >In a year or two, 4.xx would no longer be supported and no longer
> >get any fixes although you might be able to still apply some fixes
> >with a little tinkering.
> >
> >There are some comments on possible 5.xx flaws in the EMail lists.
> >Search the archives.   The FreeBSD web site Release notes & etc 
> >have notes on what new features are available in 5.xx.
> >
> >The long and short of it is that which one you install right at this
> >moment should be either 4.9 or 5.2.1 (whether you get there from
> >scratch or cvsupping) and the choice depends on 
> >  1: is your production environment critical such that an unexpected
> >     flaw in the new 5.xx branch would severly hurt you.
> >  2: Do you really need some feature in 5.2 that is unavailable in 4.xx.
> >
> >If it is yes to 1 and no to 2, then install 4.9.
> >If it is no to 1 and no to 2, then it is a coin flip.  Maybe 5.2.1 just
> >  to get in to the future or 4.9 for ease in installation and configuration.
> >If it is no to 1 and yes to 2, then install 5.2.1
> >
> >////jerry
> >
> >  
> >
> >>I've tried to grok the release engineering and all but I don't get it.
> >>I'm going to put freeBSD on 2 other machines as well,
> >>but don't know whether
> >>to install 4.9, use my 5.1 CD's (and then presumably have to
> >>go to 5.2 + ??? to keep up?), 5.2   or what.  Not to mention the
> >>2 already installed.
> >>
> >>I want to keep all 4 machines pretty much in synch.
> >>
> >>thanks for any clarification i can get on:
> >>    1. which is best "production" version
> >>    2. what is best essential upkeep mechanism (not so much for apps
> >>       but for bug fixes in OS and security fixes/patches on essential stuff
> >>       like OpenSsh)
> >>
> >>thanks much...........
> >>
> >>lee
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> >>http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> >>To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
>