Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 9 Nov 2004 10:18:39 -0600 (CST)
From:      "Jon Noack" <noackjr@alumni.rice.edu>
To:        "Rob" <spamrefuse@yahoo.com>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: standard-supfile = stable-supfile with 5.3 ?
Message-ID:  <59104.69.53.57.66.1100017119.squirrel@69.53.57.66>
In-Reply-To: <41909E5F.7020300@yahoo.com>
References:  <20041109103151.40F326147@hoppel.local> <41909E5F.7020300@yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rob wrote:
> Björn König wrote:
>> Rob wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> both have
>>>
>>>    *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5
>>>
>>> although the first one claims to download CURRENT.
>>>
>>> And, eh, why is the filename "standard-supfile" and
>>> why not the more obvious "current-supfile" ?
>>
>> It only claims, but it doesn't bring you -CURRENT.
>> That's the reason why it should not be renamed.
>> The standard-supfile contains the standard tag of your release
>> to keep it up to date. Maybe someone will change this sentence
>> in standard-supfile to 'This file contains all of the "CVSup
>> collections" that make up the FreeBSD-stable source tree.' soon.
>
> If so, then why do we have a standard-supfile and a stable-supfile doing
> the same thing? If both bring you -STABLE, one of the two seems to be
> redundant to me and having two sup files doing the same only causes
> confusion.

On 4.X they were different; stable-supfile got you RELENG_4 but
standard_supfile got you RELENG_4_X.

This same scheme was used for 5.0, but as of 5.1 it was not carried over. 
I brought this up on current@ back in December:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2003-December/thread.html#15935

The consensus was that we needed an example file for -CURRENT (say,
current-supfile) just like stable-supfile.  The behavior of
standard-supfile would then be designed to keep you tracking the most
appropriate branch (HEAD if using -CURRENT, RELENG_X if using -STABLE,
RELENG_X_Y is using a release).  My thoughts and a patch to make this
happen:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2003-December/016071.html

Jon



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?59104.69.53.57.66.1100017119.squirrel>