Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2026 18:56:08 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: pkgbase@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 291806] The pkgbase release of 15.0-RELEASE is missing the MINIMAL kernel and several other packages Message-ID: <bug-291806-36141-xzIySUU423@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-291806-36141@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=291806 --- Comment #21 from Mark Millard <marklmi26-fbsd@yahoo.com> --- (In reply to Graham Perrin from comment #20) I may be making distinctions that you are not. There are concepts of the likes of: unofficial (such as personal builds) officially-built-and-distrubted-experiments: not normally built by re and is without the re@ release guarantees even though distributed via freebsd.org official-built-and-distributed-re@-supported-releases: built by re@ with the freebsd guarantees that go with it and referenced in the announcement and release notes accessed via https://www.freebsd.org/releases/ for the release. QUOTE of bapt_at_freebsd.org from what you referenced For releng: - built it in a end less loop and publish straight each time there was changes END QUOTE Well for your interpretation of that vs. mine . . . https://www.freebsd.org/releng/#team reports: QUOTE Primary RE Team (re@FreeBSD.org) : Dave Cottlehuber <dch@FreeBSD.org>, Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org>, Jake Freeland <jfree@FreeBSD.org>, Xin Li <delphij@FreeBSD.org>, Ed Maste <emaste@FreeBSD.org>, Mahdi Mokhtari <mmokhi@FreeBSD.org>, Colin Percival <cperciva@FreeBSD.org>, Muhammad Moinur Rahman <bofh@FreeBSD.org>, Lexi Winter <ivy@FreeBSD.org> form the primary release engineering decision-making group. END QUOTE bapt@ by himself is not re@ and does not speak for re@ unless explicitly indicated --and the above that bapt referenced is not what re@ choose to do for its officially announced first release (15.0). As far as I can tell, all 14.* pkgbase build have the overall status: officially-built-and-distrubted-experiments (but not built by/for re@). The same is true for the 15.0-STABLE builds that are based on the stable/15 git branch: they have no re@ guarantee status. Using them is using experimental/developmental software. But they are officially built and distributed (by other than re@). I've been using various officially built experiments for a long time prior to 15.0. But at no time did I expect that any 14.* builds that I used, even those based on a releng/14.* git branch, had an re@ release guarantees based status, given the lack of https://www.freebsd.org/releases/ announcement and release note materials, for example. I never intended my use of "official" terminology to indicate any re@ related status unless such was also explicitly referenced. I prefer to not use personal builds for bug reporting (when I can). So I tried to report bugs shown via the officially built experiments instead, avoiding potential blame of oddities in my personal context. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-291806-36141-xzIySUU423>