Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 08:05:31 +0200 From: "Steve O'Hara-Smith" <steveo@eircom.net> To: "Juha Saarinen" <juha@saarinen.org> Cc: joe@zircon.seattle.wa.us, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Staying *really stable* in FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010624080531.1dc1bc4d.steveo@eircom.net> In-Reply-To: <00cf01c0fc40$c0348db0$0a01a8c0@den2> References: <15157.11221.593513.478892@zircon.zircon.seattle.wa.us> <00cf01c0fc40$c0348db0$0a01a8c0@den2>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001 12:00:59 +1200
"Juha Saarinen" <juha@saarinen.org> wrote:
JS> :: The tracking of stable is not for everyone. Noone *needs* to track
JS> :: stable.
JS>
JS> Well, that isn't what the Handbook says:
JS>
JS> "19.2.2.2. Who needs FreeBSD-STABLE?
JS> If you are a commercial user or someone who puts maximum stability of
JS> their FreeBSD system before all other concerns, you should consider
Emphasis on this word _________________________________^^^^^^^^
JS> Reading that para (plus the ones before that), effectively tells you
JS> that -STABLE is what you should use for err.... maximum stability. You
JS> get the bugfixes and security fixes that aren't in -RELEASE.
Reading further will show that this comes with an *inevitable* price namely
that you have to read -stable and be sensible about it.
JS> So... you need to track -STABLE, right?
JS> :: the peculiar make used by FreeBSD. What we need is an apt-get-like
JS> :: upgrade path for security fixes that solves the problem of people
The new security fix only branch should serve this need nicely. Now -stable
is only needed for those who want/need to track bug fixes and new features.
--
Directable Mirrors - A Better Way To Focus The Sun
http://www.best.com/~sohara
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010624080531.1dc1bc4d.steveo>