On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 12:36 PM, T. Valent <tmp-ml@4ss.de> wrote:
quoted text
> Folks, yes, I appreciate your attempt to help a lot. And I really am on
> your side if we're talking about "normal" machines.
>
> However, obviously nobody believes me when I say "For us there is no
> reason to update to newer versions of OpenBSD yet. On the contrary,
> maintenance is a lot easier for us if we try to keep all systems on the
> same versions for as long as possible." I admit I could have been more
> precise, but in the end that just doesn't have to do anything with the
> question, it just explains what reasons I have to not update. So don't
> let me waffle about why this is so. Just trust me, it is so.
>
> When it comes to "normal" servers, where I still have access via SSH or
> console, I'm on your side like I said. The machines I'm talking about
> are not within reach, neither physically, nor is there anything like SHH
> or any other console to update the kernel and libraries. And they are in
> larger numbers. Changing the kernel on all these machines gives us no
> benefit at all on the technical side (because it's already perfect the
> way it is with 4.3), while it would be a vast amount of work to contact
> all customers, send them new versions on some HD and make them install
> that. And off course I'd like to keep as many machines I roll out at the
> same version, because diversification complicated future maintenance.
>
>> Don't be afraid of change.
>
> :-) I'm not.
>
> And you, don't be afraid of believing people who say they have their
> reasons for doing things differently.
>
> However, I perfectly understand why updating is usually a good idea
> whenever possible.
>
> In the end it seems like I have to give up the idea of keeping all
> installations on the same level, it seems like I have create a complete
> new platform (new motherboard type and new OpenBSD version) for all new
> customers, just because I cannot find any compatible motherboard anymore.
>
> Thanks anyway!
>
> T.


Instead of wanting to run older OSs (for whatever reason on newer
hardware) why not make sure that you only buy hardware that is a part
of a long term stable system image project from XYZ vendor?
    Now whilst I think running older code is a bad idea in general, it
thats what you need to do for whatever reason then stable hardware
platforms are what you're looking for.

All the systems I deploy are based on the AMD business class system
image project and I recently replaced a whole system (bar HDD) with a
completely brand new mobo/cpu etc. and NOTHING changed from the OS's
perspective.
    Everything was EXACTLY as it was before, bar a 30%-ish performance increase.



-- 
"Opportunity is most often missed by people because it is dressed in
overalls and looks like work."
    Thomas Alva Edison
    Inventor of 1093 patents, including:
        The light bulb, phonogram and motion pictures.