From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 17 00:41:34 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07E2616A420 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 00:41:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from iaccounts@ibctech.ca) Received: from pearl.ibctech.ca (pearl.ibctech.ca [209.167.58.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98ED243D73 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 00:41:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from iaccounts@ibctech.ca) Received: (qmail 2848 invoked by uid 1002); 17 Nov 2005 00:42:03 -0000 Received: from iaccounts@ibctech.ca by pearl.ibctech.ca by uid 89 with qmail-scanner-1.22 (spamassassin: 2.64. Clear:RC:1(209.167.16.15):. Processed in 8.430965 secs); 17 Nov 2005 00:42:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fuze) (209.167.16.15) by pearl.ibctech.ca with SMTP; 17 Nov 2005 00:41:52 -0000 From: "Steve Bertrand" To: "'Dan O'Connor'" Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:41:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 Thread-Index: AcXrDl11soAWP0txS+C9Q8N3VdYHdQAAG2mA In-Reply-To: <02db01c5eb0e$3ba86b90$0599460a@Dan> X-Qmail-Scanner-Message-ID: <11321881166752842@pearl.ibctech.ca> Message-Id: <20051117004128.98ED243D73@mx1.FreeBSD.org> Cc: 'FreeBSD Questions' Subject: RE: Release engineering confusion 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: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 00:41:34 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan O'Connor [mailto:dan@ferrarishields.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 7:31 PM > To: Steve Bertrand > Cc: 'FreeBSD Questions' > Subject: Re: Release engineering confusion > > > Thank you. However, that entire page out of the handbook > pretty much > > clarifies that a production environment should *not* track either > > STABLE or CURRENT. > > > > So I'm assuming I'm best off with RELENG_6_0 etc, etc? Does anyone > > here actually run STABLE or CURRENT in a production > environment? I've > > personally had the most luck with RELENG_4 which is still > my main box, > > but now my curiosity has got the best of me. > > Yes, production servers should track -STABLE, since it's, > well, stable... > > -CURRENT is the development branch, so for a production > server, don't use that. But RELENG_6_0 is the 6.0-RELEASE > tag, and you'll never get any updates (bug fixes, security > patches, etc). > This is why I am confused, because as per the handbook (20.2.2.2): "For these reasons, we do not recommend that you blindly track FreeBSD-STABLE, and it is particularly important that you do not update any production servers to FreeBSD-STABLE without first thoroughly testing the code in your development environment." Also in there, it states that one does NOT need to follow stable to get the latest security/bug fixes, which makes me believe that on my production network, I should track RELENG_6_X (security/bug fix), and in my devel lab, RELENG_6 (STABLE). Appreciating, but 'disagreeing' with your comment that _6_0 will NOT get the sec/bug updates from my understanding so far. It is my understanding that _6_0 will get ALL the bug/sec updates, but nothing else because it is *frozen*, making it preferrably the track to follow in a pure, 24/7/365 environment, because new 'tricks' or 'features' are not introduced here. Does that seem accurate? Steve > ~Dan > > > >