# release vs stable (8.0)



## maitrikarunar (Nov 29, 2009)

release vs stable
which one i should take release or stable version ? i heard stable version has a better hardware support ... ?
another reason ?
how can i take stable version ?


----------



## aragon (Nov 29, 2009)

Stable for desktops, laptops, and general use.

Release for servers.


----------



## bryn1u (Nov 29, 2009)

what kind of diffrences there are among release and stable ? Why stable on desktops, release for servers ?


----------



## DutchDaemon (Nov 29, 2009)

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html#STABLE


----------



## zeiz (Nov 29, 2009)

8.0-RELEASE was done and configured with all the packages to be rock solid and no more changes for it (except security patches). I disagree that it's mostly for servers, it's for anyone who likes stability or is just starting an exploring of FreeBSD and willing to learn step by step. 
8-STABLE is changing and moving ahead to 8.1-RELEASE then to 8.2 etc. This is quite obvious. Practically STABLE may have problems from time to time and some knowledge is required to overcome them.

To get 8-STABLE it's enough to boot any recent (could be even 6.4) CD and choose "Custom" installation. Go to "Options" and highlight there name of the release given, for example 7.2-RELEASE or 6.2-RELEASE as on figure 2.11 in Handbook (please read). Then press Space and change what's written there to 8-STABLE. Review other options, choose media type - FTP because there is nothing for 8-STABLE on the boot CD. Then just proceed with sysinstall as described in the Handbook
A few years ago I started with RELEASE and THANKS GOD. I don't know your level of experience but if you are a novice I would recommend 8.0-RELEASE: download DVD, get everything at once, read the Handbook and ask questions here keeping in mind that it's not life time decision: you can later upgrade to STABLE if you want. But in meantime you will understand yourself do you really need STABLE or even CURRENT or you are quite happy with RELEASEs (and your hardware is perfectly supported by RELEASE).


----------



## maitrikarunar (Nov 30, 2009)

well i've used freebsd since 2 years ago...
i used freebsd release 7.0 and then my families don't like it...
so i used freebsd.... 
all is happy now. 
i want to learn freebsd again after several time...


----------



## maitrikarunar (Nov 30, 2009)

maitrikarunar said:
			
		

> well i've used freebsd since 2 years ago...
> i used freebsd release 7.0 and then my families don't like it...
> so i used pc-bsd....
> all is happy now.
> i want to learn freebsd again after several time...



ps : sorry i'm rather sleepy now...


----------



## SirDice (Nov 30, 2009)

Please note that -STABLE and -RELEASE only refer to the base OS. It has nothing to do with the ports.


----------



## Beastie (Nov 30, 2009)

But on the other hand, there are RELEASE and STABLE package repositories, and it's usually not recommended to mix a RELEASE base with a STABLE package set.


----------



## SirDice (Nov 30, 2009)

Beastie said:
			
		

> But on the other hand, there are RELEASE and STABLE package repositories, and it's usually not recommended to mix a RELEASE base with a STABLE package set.



Actually, I do recommend it. After a while the packages in the RELEASE directory are old. They could also contain serious security vulnerabilities. The RELEASE packages are a one shot deal, created when the release came out and are _never_ updated.


----------



## Beastie (Nov 30, 2009)

SirDice said:
			
		

> After a while the packages in the RELEASE directory are old. They could also contain serious security vulnerabilities. The RELEASE packages are a one shot deal, created when the release came out and are _never_ updated.


I never said otherwise. What I'm saying is that it's better to keep both the base and the package set synced, i.e. to have FreeBSD-x.x-STABLE and add packages from a STABLE repository.
Did you ever mix a RELEASE base with a STABLE package set successfully for more than a month or two? Every time I did that, I got problems. For example I tried updating GTK and some GTK-based applications started to crash at startup or during runtime and others showed errors on tty0. Glib used to be troublesome too. I don't remember what I tried updating once (maybe it was python), and fvwm refused to start anymore. Then I reinstalled the old versions of dependencies and everything worked again.


----------



## SirDice (Nov 30, 2009)

> Did you ever mix a RELEASE base with a STABLE package set successfully for more than a month or two?


Yes.



> Every time I did that, I got problems. For example I tried updating GTK and some GTK-based applications started to crash at startup or during runtime and others showed errors on tty0. Glib used to be troublesome too. I don't remember what I tried updating once (maybe it was python), and fvwm refused to start anymore. Then I reinstalled the old versions of dependencies and everything worked again.


I don't use GTK or even X based applications on a production server. The problems you had probably were the result of misaligned dependencies. I never had any issues (+10 years running).

Using -RELEASE packages for extended periods will mean your services (apache, php, mysql etc.) will get old. Old usually means vulnerable to security problems. It's really _not_ good advice. 

On servers, for the base OS, stick to a RELEASE (including security patches). Everything else just use the current ports tree (there's only one ports tree anyway). Keep your ports tree up to date, keep tabs on it with portaudit. I'll advise to build your own packages anyway, that way you can add/remove options (like the php apache module).

For workstations I prefer -STABLE. But that's just me. I like to try new features without going for the sometimes quite unstable -CURRENT.


----------

