Re: stability of 1.6

Andrew Sullivan (asullivan@sprint.ca)
Thu, 7 Jan 1999 14:05:20 -0500 (EST)


On Thu, 7 Jan 1999, Wandered Inn wrote:

> I've been running 1.4.0 for a while, and was considering upgrading to
> the latest 1.6 stuff.  I'm a bit concerned based on the number of
> problems I've seen pass this list.  How would people compare the
> stability of 1.4 verses 1.6?  1.4 works fine, although there are some
> small problems that kind of bug me.  I use this box for work, so I
> really can't afford less stability.  Thanks for any feedback.

I think that the 1.6 series is far more stable than anything in the 1.4
series.  And also, the really HUGE memory leak from 1.4.0 is gone.

The main difficulty for most people has come from two things:

1.	Failing to remove the old configuration files before going to the
new version.

2.	Failing to notice that the new binaries are in a different place.
This is particularly a problem on Red Hat it seems, because people are
having a hard time finding anything in /usr/local/bin.  (Several people
have told me that they are running as root (!), and /usr/local/bin is not
in their path.)

Both of these problems are mentioned (now repeatedly) in the FAQ, so if
you follow the upgrade instructions, you shouldn't have any trouble.

A.

Andrew Sullivan | asullivan@sprint.ca (better)| ajsulliv@mcmaster.ca (worse)
                                   *  *  *
              Go to http://www.afterstep.org/help/, or issue
'finger -l ajsulliv@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca' to find the AfterStep FAQ file.


--
   WWW:   http://www.afterstep.org/
   FTP:   ftp://ftp.afterstep.org/
   MAIL:  http://www.caldera.com/linuxcenter/forums/afterstep.html