How "safe" is 5.2 to use?

Tue Jan 13 07:20:24 PST 2004

On Jan 13, 2004, at 4:45 AM, Vahric MUHTARYAN wrote:

> Hi ,
>
> You have to use FreeBSD 4.9, because you can see in freebsd web page
> prodcution version is 4.9. and please test it maybe you will see you 
> can not
> install 5.2 on your hardware because when I try to install 5.1 on my 
> intel
> platform I faced a problem then now I'm using 4.9 . Everybody will say 
> that
> wait until more tested version and now its 4.9
>

Which begs the question.  Will FBSD 5 ever be deemed worthy for 
production use?  Over the last year it was said in this list:  5.1 is 
still a testing version not recommended for production, but 5.2 will be 
better suited for production.

I intend to transition a less used production server from 4.7 to 5.2 
sometime in the next month, and we'll see how it goes.    There are 
certain things I would like from 5...

Chad

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org] On Behalf Of David Meier
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:19 PM
> To: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> Subject: How "safe" is 5.2 to use?
>
> Hello list,
>
> I am relatively new to the world of FreeBSD. But first, congrats to the
> new release! I am somewhat insecure on how trustfully I can use the new
> release for my intended use (and I hope my questions haven't been 
> posted a
> zillion times before). Therefore I hope the FreeBSD nuts can advise me
> whether to go for 4.9 or 5.2.