From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Aug 3 23:25:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from web14602.mail.yahoo.com (web14602.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.224.82]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A232737B403 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 23:25:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from just6979@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20010804062540.69210.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [24.91.222.112] by web14602.mail.yahoo.com; Fri, 03 Aug 2001 23:25:40 PDT Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 23:25:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Justin White Reply-To: jowhite@bigfoot.com Subject: patch level in name? (Re: RELENG_4_3 calls itself...) To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <01080403365700.00392@spatula.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --- Andrew Boothman wrote: --- snip --- > How do we feel about 4.4-RELEASE-PATCH1, 4.4-RELEASE-p1 or > 4.4-RELEASEp1 for > the first commit RELENG_4_4 and 4.4-RELEASE-p2 for the second.... ? > > This idea has already been mentioned by various other people, but > seems to > have been largely ignored by the rest of the conversation which, > quite > understandably, became more interested in vegetables and flightless > birds. :-) > > I think this is the best option for several reasons : > > 1) It makes it clear that the version you are running is basically > 4.4-RELEASE plus 'something'. > > 2) We can tell at a glance whether you are patched against a spacific > > vulnerability. Security advisories can say "patched in 4.4-RELEASE-p5 > simply > type 'uname -r' to determine if your system has been updated since > the > vulnerability was patched" > > My original problem with the concept with the -SECURITY name was that > you > can't tell if you have been patched against something. Of course, > just > calling it -SECURITY doesn't make it any more obvious, but the patch > numbers > do make it obvious. --- snip --- I just cvsupped to stable for the first time a few weeks ago. i've been reading the list and seeing all this confusion. i have to say i fully beleive it's from not reading the documentation thouroughly. i read the handbook, asked around a little, and read a bunch of FAQs. i've always felt i had a good idea of what -RELEASE , -STABLE, and -CURRENT meant. Reading all theis about names has confirmed what I had gathered, simply **from reading the docs**! Anyway, I have to agree with the idea of patches being incorporated into the name for RELENG_4_3. You'll be able to know from a glance what fixes are incorporated into a particular build on a particluar machine. Even if only effected binaries are rebuilt, you at least have a base to be sure of certain fixes. Since this branch is based mostly on security, quickly being able to tell what security fixes are present is a Good Thing. So I vote for either patch numbers (4.4-RELEASE-P2) or minor-minor (right term?) release versions (4.4.2-RELEASE). Unless perhaps release engineers want to reserve minor-minor version numbers for things that are too "big" for RELENG_4_3 type branched, whatever it ends up being called. Of course, if we do want to switch to naming every release, like Debian, or otherwise, both techniques still work. IE: 4.4-BEET-P2 or 4.4.2-BEET -Justin __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message