Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 14:35:32 -0500 From: Paul Mather <paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> To: Dennis Clarke <dclarke@blastwave.org> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: poudriere and the user ... is it mostly a lost idea? Message-ID: <A8CB06B3-D2E2-405B-BB20-68BF7F5C4D55@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> In-Reply-To: <ea047ecb-4bd0-44f5-b7ba-377c92a4961c@blastwave.org> References: <DFFCAD5E-9D00-4EE6-8EBD-7B7BEA7693A2.ref@yahoo.com> <DFFCAD5E-9D00-4EE6-8EBD-7B7BEA7693A2@yahoo.com> <ea047ecb-4bd0-44f5-b7ba-377c92a4961c@blastwave.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 17, 2025, at 1:30=E2=80=AFpm, Dennis Clarke =
<dclarke@blastwave.org> wrote:
> I have plenty of logs. Piles of them. Perhaps the problem is that I
> am building on a 15-CURRENT machine which has poudriere jails like so =
:
>=20
> titan# poudriere jails -l=20
> JAILNAME VERSION ARCH METHOD TIMESTAMP =
PATH=20
> 134amd64 13.4-RELEASE-p2 1304000 3f40d5821eca amd64 git+https =
2025-01-10 10:42:08 /poudriere/jails/134amd64=20
> 142amd64 14.2-RELEASE 1402000 c8918d6c7412 amd64 git+https =
2024-12-03 12:50:29 /poudriere/jails/142amd64=20
> 140amd64 14.2-STABLE 1402501 e6de39be80e2 amd64 git+https =
2025-01-13 21:36:43 /poudriere/jails/140amd64=20
> 150amd64 15.0-CURRENT 1500030 amd64 src=3D/usr/src =
2025-01-12 07:44:29 /poudriere/jails/150amd64=20
> titan#
>=20
> The one called 140stable is a bit strange given that I built it with =
the
> branch called "releng" for 14 and what I get is 14.2-STABLE. Whatever
> that is. I had the silly notion that something called "STABLE" is a =
good
> place to build packages. A stable is where one may keep horses. Maybe
> goats. Other than that I really do not know if building packages in =
that
> jail would be of any value compared to the 142amd64 jail. Who knows?
> I surely do not.
The FreeBSD Handbook might help you with FreeBSD-STABLE: =
https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/cutting-edge/#stable
Your 140amd64 Poudriere jail built "with the branch called "releng" for =
14" makes sense if you consider the nomenclature for FreeBSD branches =
and releases. The RELENG_N branch corresponds to FreeBSD N-STABLE, and =
a branch such as RELENG_N_R to FreeBSD N.R-RELEASE.
I usually choose to run -STABLE on my FreeBSD systems because it gives =
me a nice balance between -CURRENT and -RELEASE: for example, =
performance improvements from -CURRENT will manifest themselves in =
-STABLE before they see the light of day in -RELEASE. IIRC, I've been =
using FreeBSD since 3.5-RELEASE, having used NetBSD/pmax and =
NetBSD/alpha prior to that, and I believe I have a good idea in my own =
mind as to how things work and what the tradeoffs are by now.
More people run -RELEASE than -STABLE or -CURRENT, so if you want a =
quieter life due to wider-scale testing and bug reporting, run -RELEASE =
(on a Tier 1 platform). Similarly, if you want a quieter life, go for =
pre-built packages rather than building your own with Poudriere. I use =
Poudriere to build my own packages because I like to change quite a few =
DEFAULT_VERSIONS when building my packages and set/unset various package =
options. I realise this takes me into uncharted waters, as the testing =
base for these non-default package builds is lower than for the default =
package builds. I am assuming that risk on myself by electing to build =
my own packages via Poudriere.
Straying off the beaten path can sometimes take you to lonely places. =
:-)
Cheers,
Paul.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A8CB06B3-D2E2-405B-BB20-68BF7F5C4D55>