Release engineering confusion

David Kirchner dpk at
Thu Nov 17 00:51:19 GMT 2005

On 11/16/05, Steve Bertrand <iaccounts at> wrote:
> Thank you. However, that entire page out of the handbook pretty much
> clarifies that a production environment should *not* track either STABLE
> So I'm assuming I'm best off with RELENG_6_0 etc, etc? Does anyone here
> actually run STABLE or CURRENT in a production environment? I've
> personally had the most luck with RELENG_4 which is still my main box,
> but now my curiosity has got the best of me.
> Steve

Ultimately it depends on how much downtime and difficulty you're
willing to endure, just in case the -STABLE branch ends up not working
for your servers for some particular reason. We use -RELEASE almost
exclusively (we have one -STABLE machine, because we needed a newer
version of a kernel driver) as we manage hundreds of servers, and
there's no one -STABLE release (to properly describe the -STABLE
version you're using you have to have the date and time of the cvsup,
as opposed to -RELEASE versions being like 5.4-RELEASE-p9). It's
easier, and thus more reliable, for us to have stable(heh) version

If you're just working with a handful of servers, -STABLE would
probably be fine, as long as you have backups and know how to revert
to previous versions when it becomes necessary.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list