Re: How to keep kernel up-to-date with Security/Errata Fixes?

[Dragronfly Kernel List User <Fly_Dragon_Fly@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:21:58 -0800 (PST)
Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> :Thank you Matt!
> :
> :I think I understand now.
> :
> :If I were to install Dragonfly on a production box and wanted to be
> :completely safe, I would not upgrade it until 1.6-RELEASE came out?
> 
>     I wouldn't even upgrade it on a .0, like 1.6.0.  I'd wait for
> 1.6.2 Just like the old 4.x and 5.x days.
> 
> ...

I've been very happy with my trial so far it has performed well and
not crashed (or failed to boot) once. If its performance stays the
same I intend to install it on a production machine that is giving me
troubles with FreeBSD 5.2.

Not trying to argue with you, but simply trying to discern the
differences between the release cycles of DF and FBSD, it seems to me
that DF's RELEASE release cycle is a mixture of FBSD's Release and
Stable with some native features.

DF's patches are committed without thorough testing (like FBSD Stable)
and RELEASE sub-versions are bumped up without code freezes, release
candidates or betas (native to DF).

When DF full RELEASE versions are bumped up (I think) there are code
freezes (like FBSD Release).

If this is in fact the way DF RELEASE releases come out, I fail to see
why a 1.6.2 would be "safer" than the official 1.6.0 (or for that matter
1.4.3 vs. 1.40).

I'm simply trying to plan for the best release to install on the
production server.

Thank you.