FreeBSD 12.3
-
@daddygo said in FreeBSD 12.3:
@nollipfsense said in FreeBSD 12.3:
Yes, I like to see progress..
then when 2.6 CEWell, just noticed while updating that beginning today 2.6 is a release candidate...so, my guess is at the end of January 2022.
-
@nollipfsense said in FreeBSD 12.3:
my guess is at the end of January 2022.
I'm waiting until this point (2.6) with a lot of things (clean install + new philosophy + network map), because I am lazy with things at home...
I'm always "Up to Date - 2.5.2" I just need a brand new pfS in my house and that will be the new 2.6. :)Yes, I see that pay channel gets more.....but I don't like being restricted in deciding my HW configuration.
We have lots of original Netgate HW (in production), but I need a third-party HW supported by Netgate, which I'm happy to pay for.
-
I thought I saw under Development 2.6rc but it seems that I was dreaming. Also, I could not complete the update yesterday's snapshot instance...during the process though, I saw the pfsense.rc but the update never completed. I had to ditch that VM and create a new one, but the dashboard says only beta. So, my above guess date is out the window until dashboard says RC.
-
@nollipfsense I also saw it .
Looking at redmine, there are 91 open issues.
However, sorting them by type , most of them are already fixed, awaiting feedback.
Only 13 of them are being worked, and seem to be minor in general.So yes, its close enough to be called rc.
And in practice, works as expected. -
@netblues said in FreeBSD 12.3:
So yes, its close enough to be called rc.
Yeahhh, rather them work on it as long as necessary and when it comes out it should be good, not the same as the WG in kernel stuff.
Long drawn out even so, well plus few months is not the end of the world.Otherwise, when it works, what is your experience with the dev channel 2.6?
I used to play with these on a VM, but now I had no time for anything ):
(damn VMWare 7.0U3 a/b problem and now log4j) -
@netblues said in FreeBSD 12.3:
So yes, its close enough to be called rc.
I agree and this is what I was speaking of...see image where yellow arrow points to.
-
@nollipfsense said in FreeBSD 12.3:
agree and this is what I was speaking of...see image where yellow arrow points to.
Those are rc scripts, nothing to do with the build status/version (which would be a part of the version number, not package name).
Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!
Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!
Do not Chat/PM for help!
-
@daddygo said in FreeBSD 12.3:
@netblues said in FreeBSD 12.3:
So yes, its close enough to be called rc.
Yeahhh, rather them work on it as long as necessary and when it comes out it should be good, not the same as the WG in kernel stuff.
Long drawn out even so, well plus few months is not the end of the world.Otherwise, when it works, what is your experience with the dev channel 2.6?
I used to play with these on a VM, but now I had no time for anything ):
(damn VMWare 7.0U3 a/b problem and now log4j)Obviously this isn't an official release candidate.
But it IS stable, and comparetively the webui is much much faster, in all aspects (running on the same hardware)
Especially on older less powerfull hardware the difference is huge.I ran it under redhat enterprise kvm, in a multi vlan scenario
All vlans are routed via pf, some of them are bridged.
For some unknown reason, vlans work only when handled at the os level, not pf. But this is probably a linux thing, irrelevant of pf. -
@jimp said in FreeBSD 12.3:
@nollipfsense said in FreeBSD 12.3:
agree and this is what I was speaking of...see image where yellow arrow points to.
Those are rc scripts, nothing to do with the build status/version (which would be a part of the version number, not package name).
Well that just burst my bubble...anyway Jimp, carry on.
-
Hi guys
I know it's not advisable to run the snapshots in a production environment. However I'm interested to see if anyone is and does the bases being updated to freebsd 12.3 introduce any show stopping bugs. I only ask as I like running all my home systems on the bleeding edge of software again I know it's not advisable but is a fantastic way to learn in the event of a crash for debugging code that might not have crashed in a VM/Lab environment.
Thanks
Eoghan -
@eoghan, I have been running 2.6.0 development snapshots for months and have no complaints. If you like living on the edge, go for it.
-
@eoghan I have done it in the pass on 2.5 that was very stable...of course, you'll be at your own risk...just be sure every two or three days you make a backup of your configuration and have a jump drive with 2.6 ready to install...that way you'll be down at most half an hour. Like you, I like to live on the leading edge...too much fun!
-
Once the new version reaches beta status, it is quite safe to try it in non production, (or not very critical) systems.
If your system runs under vm in any case, then its even easier to go this way.
The benefit is that if you find a bug, chances are you will get a fix included in the release.
And yes, you have to use it to find the bug too. -
There can be a bit of a catch-22 here as well. If the vast majority of users swear off using beta or development software, then testing of new versions suffers and bugs (even critical ones) can go unnoticed all the way into release.
I fully understand not wanting to run development or beta software in a critical production system, but in many networks there are opportunities for accepting a bit of risk in the name of testing. For example, maybe for a small business there is a branch office or two where instead of RELEASE pfSense you could run DEVEL. As others have mentioned, running pfSense virtualized is a great way to help in the testing program because you can so easily rollback to a previous snapshot if you encounter a critical error.
One thing Netgate really can't do well in a software development testing lab is reproduce all the different hardware and network setups that exist with users. So having robust participation from a wide array of users in the DEVEL snapshot testing branch is vital to a successful RELEASE update.
-
@eoghan said in FreeBSD 12.3:
Hi guys
I know it's not advisable to run the snapshots in a production environment. However I'm interested to see if anyone is and does the bases being updated to freebsd 12.3 introduce any show stopping bugs. I only ask as I like running all my home systems on the bleeding edge of software again I know it's not advisable but is a fantastic way to learn in the event of a crash for debugging code that might not have crashed in a VM/Lab environment.
Thanks
EoghanNo issues from my side. I have been running it from this summer. But my use case is not your use case. Please make sure you're not installing on your production machine. Please test your use case first.
-
@nrgia But, that's exactly what he wants to do (production mode for home network) and with the proper safeguards mentioned as well as in place, we should encourage him. I find 2.6 to be very stable despite the few bugs to work out.
-
I went one step further with my backup/recovery solution.
Every couple of days I'm doing a complete clone of the ssd the I have pfsense installed on but also keeping a pfsense install usb handy just as another recovery method in case the ssd image fails to apply or something.
-
@nollipfsense said in FreeBSD 12.3:
@nrgia But, that's exactly what he wants to do (production mode for home network) and with the proper safeguards mentioned as well as in place, we should encourage him. I find 2.6 to be very stable despite the few bugs to work out.
I think you misunderstood me. I'm not trying to scare anybody away. But first, just to play it safe, it's good to test your use case on different machine, beeing bare metal or VM. And if it works, then you can upgrade the production one too. At least this is my approach. The backups are also a good thing, but sometimes even a little bit of downtime can cause troubles, why not avoid it?
-
@nrgia Okay...
-
If you didn't notice already starting from today 13/01/2022 my 2.6.0-DEVELOPMENT updated to 2.7.0-DEVELOPMENT.
How about that?
Nevermind I saw the discussion here:
