From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 12 17:23:35 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1603316A418 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:23:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jerrymc@gizmo.acns.msu.edu) Received: from gizmo.acns.msu.edu (gizmo.acns.msu.edu [35.8.1.43]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEC4513C4A5 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:23:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jerrymc@gizmo.acns.msu.edu) Received: from gizmo.acns.msu.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gizmo.acns.msu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id lACHJo2K099147; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:19:50 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jerrymc@gizmo.acns.msu.edu) Received: (from jerrymc@localhost) by gizmo.acns.msu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id lACHJnke099146; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:19:49 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jerrymc) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:19:49 -0500 From: Jerry McAllister To: Alex Zbyslaw Message-ID: <20071112171949.GG98697@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> References: <000f01c82212$c1b9e3c0$452dab40$@com> <47332EBE.3000900@gmail.com> <000a01c822b6$2f8ed060$8eac7120$@com> <47384AF7.4090106@gmail.com> <47386512.6080606@dial.pipex.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47386512.6080606@dial.pipex.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: Si Thu , Andy Greenwood , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD questions 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: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:23:35 -0000 On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 02:37:06PM +0000, Alex Zbyslaw wrote: > Andy Greenwood wrote: > > >If you want the newer versions of software from the ports tree, don't > >limit your results by the tag. Basically, you're saying (IIRC) "I want > >the version of the port that was included with this release" instead > >of "I want the most recent version of this port." the release versions > >of the ports will only be updated for bug fixes, etc. > > Unless something has changed recently, this is not correct. > > The release versions of the ports are *never* updated for anything; not > security fixes, not features, nothing. The ports tree is not like, say, > Fedora Linux rpms. I think what you want to say may be correct, but this is confusing. Ports are updated all along as port maintainers get to it. In general the ports system does not have release identifiers. It is also not specifically tied to any release. It just happens that a particilar 'snapshot' of the condition of the ports tree is put on an ISO and for good measure, gets frozen a while to give time to check it out. But, as soon as that freeze is over (which pretty much corresponds to the timing of a base system RELEASE), updates begin again as the port maintainers get around to making improvements. So, a certain condition of the ports tree and the individual ports conceptually gets tied to a certain RELEASE, but in reality is not, since changes continue to be made and you will get the most recent condidition of the ports if you do an install over the net. You will get the 'RELEASE' condition only if you install only from the ISO-s. Now, when changes are made to ports, they should be tested against something and I don't know just what they get tested against between freezes. So, whether you csup your ports tree and install over the net or install from the ISO you have burned to a CD may depend on whether an updated version of a port will work with the stuff you are trying to install it over. You may have to test. Generally the latest version is the best, but sometimes the updates may have moved the port beyond where your base system is at the moment. Of course, you could also upgrade your base system - if you need that latest instantiation of the port. The point being that ports are almost continuously being updated except for that freeze period. But, there is no general-systemwide versioning system for the ports. So, in in the base system RELEASE sense, ports is not updated - there are no numbers to update. But it is updated, in the sense that improvement are continuously made - depending on the maintainer. ////jerry > > What you say is true of the *base* system, but not true for ports. > > Technically, the ports tree is not branched, because it's a) too much of > a maintenance burden and b) apparently CVS is likely to struggle, which > I can believe. > > The ports tree is *tagged* (not branched) when the release ISOs are > made, and those tags are never moved. > > For cv(s)uping ports there are only two reasonable tags, as far as I know: > > "." which means the latest ports tree or > > a date: when you desperately need to get back to the ports tree you had > say a week ago because it worked and your current one doesn't and you > are desperate. > > --Alex > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"