Re: Why I should use FBSD 4.9/10 and not 5.2.1?
From: Michel Talon (talon_at_lpthe.jussieu.fr)
Date: 05/05/04
- Next message: Michel Talon: "Re: FBSD 5.2.1"
- Previous message: Henrik Johnsson: "Re: Is it possible ?"
- In reply to: Kris Kennaway: "Re: Why I should use FBSD 4.9/10 and not 5.2.1?"
- Next in thread: Tim Daneliuk: "Re: Why I should use FBSD 4.9/10 and not 5.2.1?"
- Reply: Tim Daneliuk: "Re: Why I should use FBSD 4.9/10 and not 5.2.1?"
- Reply: Kris Kennaway: "Re: Why I should use FBSD 4.9/10 and not 5.2.1?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 07:58:09 +0000 (UTC)
Kris Kennaway <kkenn@xor.obsecurity.org> wrote:
>
> In other words, the instability was caused by a buggy BIOS on his SMP
> hardware that just happened to be tickled by the newer version of
> FreeBSD.
This sentence exactly means that recent FreeBSD-4 versions are buggy for
all practical purposes. Ask someone who has one hundred or one thousand
servers to upgrade the BIOS of all machines, with the risks that
represents:
-that the upgrade doesn't succeed and the machine is rendered unbootable
-that the upgrade succeeds but doesn't solve the problem
not to mention that you need DOS partitions or DOS floppies and in this
case floppy drives, etc. My experience on my laptop is indeed that
FreeBSD-4 was much better around 4.5 than it is now. And i will not
upgrade BIOS at any price. I still prefer running FreeBSD-4.9 as is.
As for FreeBSD-5.2 it runs perfectly fine for me on my desktop, but
obviously this depends on the hardware, etc. Clearly it is slower than
it used to be under FreeBSD-4, notably in the network stack, but
nothing dramatic, and i can live with that. It has been perfectly
stable for me, not a single hang since i installed 5.2. I cannot say
the same thing for my other desktop which runs Debian Linux with a 2.4
kernel.
>
> Kris
-- Michel TALON
- Next message: Michel Talon: "Re: FBSD 5.2.1"
- Previous message: Henrik Johnsson: "Re: Is it possible ?"
- In reply to: Kris Kennaway: "Re: Why I should use FBSD 4.9/10 and not 5.2.1?"
- Next in thread: Tim Daneliuk: "Re: Why I should use FBSD 4.9/10 and not 5.2.1?"
- Reply: Tim Daneliuk: "Re: Why I should use FBSD 4.9/10 and not 5.2.1?"
- Reply: Kris Kennaway: "Re: Why I should use FBSD 4.9/10 and not 5.2.1?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
