Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 20:14:23 +1000 From: JacobRhoden <jrhoden@unimelb.edu.au> To: Alin-Adrian Anton <aanton@reversedhell.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: update confusion 4.8-STABLE to STABLE = 4.9-PRERELEASE !? Message-ID: <200310022014.23932.jrhoden@unimelb.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <3F7BF618.7040702@reversedhell.net> References: <3F7BEFF0.70809@reversedhell.net> <200310021949.47009.jrhoden@unimelb.edu.au> <3F7BF618.7040702@reversedhell.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 07:55 pm, Alin-Adrian Anton wrote: > Ok got it. So the name -STABLE does not necessary mean the system is > more stable than a PRERELEASE? I don't think a few security patches > shall bring the system in an unstable state. And if the pathes are > installed, the system name will remain 4.8-STABLE, not 4.9-PRERELEASE. > The advisories said to update to STABLE, so I did, and I got > 4.9-PRERELEASE. That is the new 'name' for STABLE? If I understand things correctly, There is a code branch for each major version of freebsd, ie RELENG_3, RELENG_4, etc, etc. Updates get applied to RELENG_4, and then snapshots are taken from that, so from RELENG_4, you get RELENG_4_8 and upcoming RELENG_4_9 and so on. You may wish to read http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.9R/schedule.html for details of how the "STABLE" (that is RELENG_4) turns into the upcoming 4.9-RELEASE. Regards, Jacob _________________________________ JacobRhoden -- http://rhoden.id.au/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200310022014.23932.jrhoden>