Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 14:13:38 +0200 From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@flat.berklix.net> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6vesd=E1n_G=E1bor?= <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu> Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Running i386 binaries on amd64 Message-ID: <200605151213.k4FCDcBm081238@fire.jhs.private> In-Reply-To: Message from =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6vesd=E1n_G=E1bor?= <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu> of "Mon, 15 May 2006 13:17:04 %2B0200." <44686330.2080506@t-hosting.hu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6vesd=E1n_G=E1bor?= wrote: > Julian H. Stacey wrote: > > gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu wrote: > > > >> either, you have to get the RELENG_6_1 > >> > > > > RELENG_6_1 is for stable beyond, which jim might not want, > > to match release if uname -r == 6.1-RELEASE : RELENG_6_1_0_RELEASE > > > RELENG_6_1 is *not* for stable, RELENG_6 is for stable. Yes. (Tricky word stable, I know what you mean, but I've also seen so called stable that was quite unstable on occasion way back, when one was ill advised to track beyond fixes for the specific release that was really `stable' in the real normal non BSD sense of the word, not some inter-release-hopefully-maybe-but-sometime-not-stable thing ;-) > RELENG_6_1 is > the security branch for 6.1-RELEASE, Yes. (& thus more stable (in the real sense of the word) & invariant than the inter-release progressive RELENG_6 that FreeBSD names as 'Stable') > this should be used instead of > RELENG_6_1_1_RELEASE. "Could" Yes, "Should" No. Not always. It's a matter of personal requirement that we are not qualified to dictate to others. Some few people may _really_ _want_ exactly the release for their own very good reasons eg QA stamped, part of embedded systems with expected & tested & timed repose, relied on to interact exactly as expected, or more bluntly, simply 'cos they've been told they'll be fired & or imprisoned (eg if in military or high rel. sytems), if they change an authorised code base without authority. > Currently, it doesn't make any sense, but later > security fixes will go to RELENG_6_1 Yes. >and it will be unwise to still use > RELENG_6_1_0_RELEASE. Often unwise, not always, depends on situation. Granted if a firewall or exposed to public access, generally good to have latest fixes. -- Julian Stacey. Consultant Unix Net & Sys. Eng., Munich. http://berklix.com Mail in Ascii, HTML=spam. Ihr Rauch = mein allergischer Kopfschmerz.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200605151213.k4FCDcBm081238>