From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 24 13:29:02 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7FFC106569C for ; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:29:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from masoom.shaikh@gmail.com) Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com (fk-out-0910.google.com [209.85.128.187]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 393E38FC16 for ; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:29:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from masoom.shaikh@gmail.com) Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k31so726767fkk.11 for ; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 06:29:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=bttywknXfg2osrkrINVnfZbG9f8q6glcSgScE/UMx9w=; b=Br2tH+W4MnvOh6vzFKT25Snmzi8YV8FylMeEmB+ItmkNUjPkvKpTbhHPFK0t/2qA2o toz8PmTD1f2hg6osmy4+hZPTl83lkwjKeg/TAhdmp0jtUjOUSfVtqGt/qT8to2Alc9np C0A3OevKWvRIWkC2UlXc2OHzgD+gQdUdcu/ZA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=jy8CmnQktWKLaQGmIi3CaUdQOefJDfjgDU/2X/WJ+jl9sxlLLFcCHgzE8hufAzLqmE Vq37h58LflrRXW/wToqL5GA/6l5Q5k0vNaQDLiU/J9czNjfilhprh+3Nzl9AasSh/B36 sJ6WkPxyal3HpZ70rvul8n1rh/Pq24JqT2ckM= Received: by 10.181.234.8 with SMTP id l8mr774935bkr.105.1224854940570; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 06:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.231.15 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 06:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:29:00 +0000 From: "Masoom Shaikh" To: mdh_lists@yahoo.com In-Reply-To: <171196.8233.qm@web56806.mail.re3.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20081024102632.GA11709@icarus.home.lan> <171196.8233.qm@web56806.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Jeremy Chadwick , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD-7.1, BETA2 or PRERELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:29:02 -0000 thanks to all those gr8 comments, I learnt. and sorry for creating noise, I was in office and thus could not put required effort. as far as liking of release names goes, I feel BETA-x naming practice serves the purpose, it makes sense to casual users. changing version with date is too fast....just my two cents if they count ;-) Aston On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:45 PM, mdh wrote: > --- On Fri, 10/24/08, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > > From: Jeremy Chadwick > > Subject: Re: FreeBSD-7.1, BETA2 or PRERELEASE > > To: "Masoom Shaikh" > > Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > > Date: Friday, October 24, 2008, 6:26 AM > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 03:07:32PM +0530, Masoom Shaikh > > wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > y'day I csuped the src and built installed the > > kernel from RELENG_7 > > > I was expecting FreeBSD-BETA2 in output of `uname -a` > > > it is still -PRERELEASE, is it by decision or I have > > to change something ? > > > > > > I greped /usr/src for PRERELEASE but cud not locate > > it. I guess release > > > engineering team does that. comments ? > > > > This question keeps coming up. > > > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2008-October/184992.html > > > > RELENG_7 == PRERELEASE. There is no "BETA2" tag > > to follow. > > > > No one is sure at this point where the "BETA2" > > string has come from > > (meaning why it was idealised or why it's being used). > > I'm of the > > belief that it's something Ken is hand-hacking in > > newvers.sh before > > building + making ISO releases and putting them up on the > > mirrors. > > And I am also of the opinion that this should stop, and we > > should simply > > name the releases PRERELEASE-YYYYMMDD to signify the build > > date. > > It seems likely. I've only ever seen -PRERELEASE and -STABLE, when > tracking "RELENG_[0-9]" branch. On the other hand, I have seen -RELEASE, > -BETA, -RC, etc, when installing from media. > > Perhaps differentiating these isn't a bad idea, however, when it comes to > uname output in PR's, despite the queries it generates over here. A media > install can always be safely assumed to be a given set of code, while if > someone is tracking a branch via cvsup, the build time would show up in > uname output, however the user may still need to be queried for rcsid's or > asked to cvsup to the latest if the issue is considered to possibly be a > base system and/or kernel code issue. > > It's probably worth discussion and consideration, though. I don't know > if/how useful the utility of the current naming conventions are to folks > trying to solve potential code bug PRs. > > - mdh > > > > >