Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 11:09:25 +0400 (GST) From: Rakhesh Sasidharan <rakhesh@rakhesh.com> To: Bill Stwalley <stwalley2004@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: too late to change to security branch? Message-ID: <20070930110630.Q79156@obelix.home.rakhesh.com> In-Reply-To: <687f2b920709272243w3c25f0f7t95189f1aeb3ded71@mail.gmail.com> References: <687f2b920709262347l23b3d6cfv3969ea804f4963c3@mail.gmail.com> <200709270204.09915.beech@freebsd.org> <687f2b920709272243w3c25f0f7t95189f1aeb3ded71@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I run freebsd-update and my cvsup configuration uses "*default release=cvs
> tag=.". I am actually following security branch, since I do not recompile
> the kernel, right? This cvs tag only matters if I compile the kernel,
> right?
If you are using freebsd-update then you are following the security
branch.
Even if you were using cvs and had to recompile the kernel (coz of some
patch there) you would still be following the security branch (**if** you
are tracking the security branch, that is).
In FreeBSD, the base system and the 3rd party apps are separate. The base
system has the concept of branches. The 3rd party apps (ports) are shared
amongst all, there's no concept of branches. So you can't just follow
security updates for the 3rd party apps.
HTH,
- Rakhesh
http://rakhesh.net/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070930110630.Q79156>