From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 4 10:25:37 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 2D07816A418 for ; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 10:25:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F1B313C478; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 10:25:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <46DD329E.5070002@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 12:25:34 +0200 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gueven Bay References: <46DCCC2C.7030402@greywether.com> <46DD1AF6.20900@FreeBSD.org> <13413b8f0709040236r565be4beua02cbe8080516859@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <13413b8f0709040236r565be4beua02cbe8080516859@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Philosophy of default "pkg_add -r" PACKAGESITE? 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: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:25:37 -0000 Gueven Bay wrote: >>> I'm curious, why does "pkg_add -r" point to the "release" snapshot of >>> ports by default? Is the idea that a "release" is well-tested and that >>> any deviation from that (even security or bug-fix changes) is an unknown >>> that new users need to be shielded against when grabbing packages with >>> "pkg_add -r"? Seems to me it would be better to have "pkg_add -r" point >>> to stable (which, if I understand things correctly, does get updated >>> packages). >> -release packages have gone through an extensive period of testing with >> that release, so you have more confidence they will work. The >> up-to-date packages may not work, may not even be present on the FTP >> site, and in general are not suitable for users who just want a working >> system without having to fiddle with it. >> >> i.e. defaulting to the packages that came with the release is a >> conservative step that is appropriate for users who just want packages >> that work, and don't care about always having the latest versions. For >> the rest of you, you're going to be doing a lot more hands on admin >> anyway, so setting one env variable is not a heavy burden. > > Do the -release packages get updates for security (and only for > security) reasons? > I ask because I don't find any information about this on the FBSD webpages. No, we don't have the resources. Kris